UK PM frontrunner fends off court case over Brexit campaign bus claim

By Michael Holden

 

FILE PHOTO: Former British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, who is running to succeed Theresa May as Prime Minister, leaves his home in London, Britain, May 30, 2019. REUTERS/Hannah McKay/File Photo

 

LONDON (Reuters) - Judges at London’s High Court on Friday threw out an attempt to prosecute Boris Johnson, the frontrunner to succeed Theresa May as prime minister, for allegedly lying about the financial benefits of Brexit during the 2016 EU referendum campaign.

 

Last week, a magistrate agreed to issue summonses for Johnson to face charges of misconduct in public office over a claim emblazoned on his bright red "Leave" campaign bus that Britain would be 350 million pounds ($446 million) a week better off outside the EU.

 

Opponents had argued that the slogan was deliberately misleading and it became symbolic of the divisions caused by the referendum, which saw Britons vote 52-48% to leave the European Union.

 

Marcus Ball, 29, who described himself as a social enterprise founder, brought the private prosecution against Johnson in February which led to last week's decision.

 

But at a judicial review hearing on Friday at the High Court, Johnson's lawyer Adrian Darbishire said the magistrate had either erred in law or provided the wrong legal test in allowing the case to go ahead.

 

Darbishire said the only rational conclusion was that the case was politically motivated and therefore without merit.

 

The High Court judges agreed the summonses should be quashed, saying they would give their reasons at a later date.

 

The flamboyant Johnson, who did not attend Friday's hearing, is the favourite among Conservative lawmakers hoping to replace May as party leader and therefore prime minister.

 

The case could potentially have damaged his bid to replace May, who stepped down as Conservative leader on Friday although she will remain prime minister until a successor is selected.

 

"POLITICAL PROSECUTION"

 

Friday's challenge, brought in the former foreign minister's full name - Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson - examined whether a politician could be accused of criminal misconduct over statements made during political campaigning.

 

"Standing on the hustings is not the exercise of state power, and doing something naughty on the hustings is not an abuse of state power," said Darbishire.

 

He said it was not for the police or juries to stray into the sphere of political debate and that it was for the electorate to decide on the truth of claims.

 

Ball's overt opposition to Brexit and desire to have it stopped also showed the case had no legal merit, Darbishire added. "This is realistically, plainly speaking, a political prosecution," he said.

 

After the verdict, Ball, who has raised more than 350,000 pounds through crowd-funding to pursue the prosecution, said he would mull whether to appeal, saying his case was not about stopping Brexit.

 

"I will not give up until I believe that all possible options are exhausted," he said.

 

"If you are an elected representative and you are talking about people's money ... it's not correct for a member of parliament to lie to everybody about that."

 

As for the 350 million claim itself, Johnson's lawyers said he denied acting dishonestly in any way and the figure remained contentious.

 

"It is still being adhered to today," Darbishire said.

 

($1 = 0.7842 pounds)

 

(Editing by Stephen Addison and Andrew Cawthorne)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2019-06-08

Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking Thailand news and visa info

Rightly so. Whether you like him or not the whole thing was a farce and disgraceful.

Edited June 7, 20197 yr by Laughing Gravy

And the lyer is likely to be our next PM...

 

 

Makes Trump look like a saint...

4 minutes ago, Laughing Gravy said:

Rightly so. Whether you like him or not the whole thing was a farce and disgraceful.

sure was...

4 minutes ago, Basil B said:

sure was...

So did Boris paint that on himself. Even for the mentally challenged i still can't see where it says we will send 350 million to the NHS. After over 3 years remainers are still holding onto a suggestion. should George Osbourne be in the doc for saying all those jobs would be lost the day after the referendum. No because it is childish just like trying to justify this and going on about a politician said this or that.

Edited June 7, 20197 yr by Laughing Gravy

12 minutes ago, Laughing Gravy said:

So did Boris paint that on himself.

Thanks for bringing that to my attention...

 

So who did?

"Under the Representation of the People Act 1983, there are rules about putting imprints on election material. Election material is any material that can be reasonably regarded as intended to promote or procure the election of a candidate at an election. Whenever printed election material is produced, it must contain certain details (which we refer to as an ‘imprint’) to show who is responsible for the production of the material. This helps to ensure there is transparency about who is campaigning."

https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/194390/Factsheet-Candidates-Imprints-May-2016.pdf

I assume the rules for the referendum are the same as for any other election?

9 minutes ago, Basil B said:

Thanks for bringing that to my attention...

 

So who did?

"Under the Representation of the People Act 1983, there are rules about putting imprints on election material. Election material is any material that can be reasonably regarded as intended to promote or procure the election of a candidate at an election. Whenever printed election material is produced, it must contain certain details (which we refer to as an ‘imprint’) to show who is responsible for the production of the material. This helps to ensure there is transparency about who is campaigning."

https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/194390/Factsheet-Candidates-Imprints-May-2016.pdf

I assume the rules for the referendum are the same as for any other election?

So why wasn't Gove and others in court. So he has been cleared regardless of the idiocy about the whole affair.

 

You are trying to justify Boris Johnson being accused for a slogan that in itself has interpretations. You will be saying throwing milkshakes is acceptable now.

If we prosecuted every politician that misled us there would be no one left.

He is not to be prosecuted ,it was just thrown out of court in 5 minutes ,now as for the guy who crowdfunded it ,is he going to return the 200k oh i forgot he has already spent 50k on himself .his flat etc .

3 hours ago, Basil B said:

And the lyer is likely to be our next PM...

 

 

Makes Trump look like a saint...

You obviously know nothing about Trump !

3 hours ago, sungod said:

If we prosecuted every politician that misled us there would be no one left.

That would probably be a good thing ????!

 

Unfortunately it would result in even more chaos ☹️.

 

Nonetheless, targeting Boris alone was clearly political - hence the 5 minutes it took for the High Court judges to reach a decision.

3 hours ago, bert bloggs said:

He is not to be prosecuted ,it was just thrown out of court in 5 minutes ,now as for the guy who crowdfunded it ,is he going to return the 200k oh i forgot he has already spent 50k on himself .his flat etc .

I haven't looked into how the money raised was spent - but hopefully he had to pay all costs - from both sides.

6 hours ago, Laughing Gravy said:

Rightly so. Whether you like him or not the whole thing was a farce and disgraceful.

I wonder what's in store for Raab & Hunt this weekend, given Boris & now Gove have had 'Round 1'?

Just an observation.  But the New Normal seems to be to find a way to prosecute your political rivals. Can't find something solid, then make stuff up and feed it to the MSM who will then disseminate it to a relatively dumb population who will accept anything their favorite 'talking head' says without question.  Tried and convicted in the court of public opinion - then demand legal sanctions.  The Western legislative model is totally broken in my humble opinion.  One of many things broken in The Exceptional West imho.

1 hour ago, evadgib said:

I wonder what's in store for Raab & Hunt this weekend, given Boris & now Gove have had 'Round 1'?

Where did Rory Stewart spring from, if he gets in the Tories are well and truly doomed.

 

17 minutes ago, vogie said:

Where did Rory Stewart spring from, if he gets in the Tories are well and truly doomed.

 

He lacks charisma & is far too wet IMO.

7 hours ago, sungod said:

If we prosecuted every politician that misled us there would be no one left.

Not so long ago we had in Germany a bunch of lying politicians. Just celebrated the invasion the kock them out of office...

At least one thing is clear now: a British politician is allowed to lie, cheat, tell nonsense etc with ZERO repercussions. Curious with what Boris the Liar will come back to the UK with after his first talks with the EU. Could be everyting. Maybe a murder accusation ? ? 

Edited June 8, 20197 yr by puipuitom

2 hours ago, vogie said:

Where did Rory Stewart spring from, if he gets in the Tories are well and truly doomed.

 

Don't get your Knickers in a twist...

 

The poll was about who they thought would make a good PM (best of the bad ), not who they would vote for.????

3 minutes ago, Basil B said:

Don't get your Knickers in a twist...

 

The poll was about who they thought would make a good PM (best of the bad ), not who they would vote for.????

I think they must have asked all remainers. Stewart is possibly the worst of the worst.

2 hours ago, vogie said:

Where did Rory Stewart spring from, if he gets in the Tories are well and truly doomed.

 

% saying Good PM? Where is this from?

3 minutes ago, nauseus said:

% saying Good PM? Where is this from?

YouGov Poll. ????

10 hours ago, Basil B said:

Thanks for bringing that to my attention...

 

So who did?

"Under the Representation of the People Act 1983, there are rules about putting imprints on election material. Election material is any material that can be reasonably regarded as intended to promote or procure the election of a candidate at an election. Whenever printed election material is produced, it must contain certain details (which we refer to as an ‘imprint’) to show who is responsible for the production of the material. This helps to ensure there is transparency about who is campaigning."

https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/194390/Factsheet-Candidates-Imprints-May-2016.pdf

I assume the rules for the referendum are the same as for any other election?

It wasn't an election. It was a referendum. Completely unrelated as the electorate are voting on political question.

Edited June 8, 20197 yr by Reigntax

26 minutes ago, vogie said:

I think they must have asked all remainers. Stewart is possibly the worst of the worst.

Probably when the pollsters read out the list of runners the old biddies thought they said Rod Stewart...

14 minutes ago, Reigntax said:

It wasn't an election. It was a referendum. Completely unrelated as the electorate are voting on political question.

Election law still applies...

4 minutes ago, Basil B said:

Probably when the pollsters read out the list of runners the old biddies thought they said Rod Stewart...

Not a lot of people know this but Rod is his real name. From wiki : Roderick James Nugent "Rory" Stewart

 

But every picture tells a story.

Edited June 8, 20197 yr by vogie

4 minutes ago, vogie said:

Not a lot of people know this but Rod is his real name. From wiki : Roderick James Nugent "Rory" Stewart

And another ******* Etonion...

57 minutes ago, vogie said:

YouGov Poll. ????

Explains a lot. Thanks.

Stewart is the best of the lot!  He is the only tory that is any good

23 hours ago, Basil B said:

Thanks for bringing that to my attention...

 

So who did?

"Under the Representation of the People Act 1983, there are rules about putting imprints on election material. Election material is any material that can be reasonably regarded as intended to promote or procure the election of a candidate at an election. Whenever printed election material is produced, it must contain certain details (which we refer to as an ‘imprint’) to show who is responsible for the production of the material. This helps to ensure there is transparency about who is campaigning."

https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/194390/Factsheet-Candidates-Imprints-May-2016.pdf

I assume the rules for the referendum are the same as for any other election?

The claim of £350m can be broken down into two parts. The money we pay and then the suggestion that all of that money would be spent on the NHS. First of all we do pay £350m per week. The rebate which is half of that isn't ours to do with as we please whereas it would be after Brexit. The second part about spending it all on the NHS was a suggestion of where it could go after we stop paying not a direct promise. It could be spent on the NHS or any number of other worthy recipients.

 

This case was all about blocking Brexit, nothing else.

An inflammatory meme has been reported and removed.