Harman cannot sit in judgment of PM
THE INQUIRY set up to determine whether the Prime Minister lied to the House of Commons when he denied partying in Downing Street is compromised before it even begins sitting. The chairman, after Labour’s Chris Bryant honourably stood down because he had already made public comment on the issue, is now Harriet Harman, who has accused the Prime Minister of lying in the past.
I know of no legal system in the civilised world where a judge would be appointed to assess whether somebody was lying if he or she had already branded that person a liar. It is an outrage against justice.
Then the inquiry has announced that it will take evidence from witnesses anonymously. Again, other than in sexual assault cases and in some cases of blackmail, I know of no circumstance where witnesses can give evidence anonymously. An accused person has an absolute right to know who his or her accusers are and to be allowed to cross-examine them.
Yes, it is some small comfort that a former appeal court judge is to act as “adviser” but no matter how upright he himself may be, no matter how free he is from fear or favour, he should never, as a member of the judiciary, be participating in a process with such flawed systems.
AFTER the Owen Paterson farce in which the system was yet again rightly criticised, Boris rushed in like a bull in a china shop, announcing a review with the intention of changing the system. Inevitably he was accused of trying to save a pal. Nevertheless a review was commissioned and the very judge now advising the Harriet Harman inquiry did indeed recommend some changes. Clearly those changes did not go far enough and it is hardly a rash prediction that, should Boris be found guilty, this will be branded a kangaroo court.Therefore that outcome should be preempted by standing down Ms Harman now (she is too shameless to go of her own accord) and announcing that the defence will have the right to cross-examine all witnesses and that justice will not just be done but will be seen to be done. Anything less makes a mockery of justice and indeed of Parliament.