No 10 fears PM faces ‘kangaroo court’

Allies say Johnson will not get fair hearing over allegation he misled Parliament

THE inquiry into whether Boris Johnson misled Parliament over partygate risks becoming a “kangaroo court”, Downing Street sources claimed last night.

Allies of the Prime Minister accused the inquiry launched by the House of Commons’ privileges committee yesterday of relying on “hearsay evidence” after MPS ruled that witnesses will be granted anonymity.

They also questioned why Harriet Harman has been allowed to chair the investigation, which could determine Mr Johnson’s fate as Prime Minister, despite the Labour grandee suggesting as recently as April that Mr Johnson had lied.

By questioning the integrity of the investigation it is likely that Downing Street is preparing to challenge any negative findings made by the committee, and raises the prospect that the Prime Minister would refuse to resign if found to have misled Parliament.

Downing Street is already pressing MPS to allow Mr Johnson to question witnesses and to take legal advice when hearings get under way this autumn.

If it is decided Mr Johnson knowingly lied to the Commons and is suspended from the House, it will almost certainly trigger another no confidence vote in his leadership.

The news came as Mr Johnson refused three times to say whether he is planning a snap election this year, amid speculation a vote could be called if Sir Keir Starmer is forced to resign as Labour leader over a beer and curry evening during lockdown in Durham.

The privileges committee said yesterday it would look at whether Mr Johnson “misled the House” when he insisted that “all guidance was followed in No 10” and that there was “no party” in 10 Downing St.

The committee – comprising seven MPS, four Tories, two from Labour and one from the SNP – wanted evidence of “Mr Johnson’s knowledge of the activities in 10 Downing Street and the Cabinet Office under Covid-19 regulations, from the occurrence of those events until now [and] any briefing given to, or inquiries made by, Mr Johnson relating to those events”.

The committee also “confirmed it would be willing to take oral or written evidence from people who wish to remain anonymous” before July 29, raising the prospect of former or current colleagues of Mr Johnson giving evidence against him.

Although a partygate report by Sue Gray, the former Whitehall ethics chief, kept identities of witnesses secret, one No 10 source said it would be difficult for Mr Johnson to challenge anonymous evidence which effectively could be hearsay.

The insider said: “How can a ‘defendant’ question or cross-examine anonymous evidence?”

An MP friend of Mr Johnson added: “It is bonkers. Going on hearsay evidence is not in the spirit of it. How can you interrogate someone who has not turned up?

“If you don’t trust the process how can you trust the result. It is a disservice to the House of Commons.”

The appointment of Ms Harman comes after Labour’s Chris Bryant stepped aside to ensure fairness because of his previous criticism of Mr Johnson.

The privileges committee is being advised by former High Court Judge Sir Ernest Ryder who has recommended that MPS under investigation should be given “the opportunity to take legal advice and have legal assistance (as distinct from legal representation) throughout the process”.

A Downing Street spokesman said: “The Prime Minister will assist the committee in their inquiries and looks forward to the matter coming to a prompt conclusion.”