The Boris Johnson ‘Partygate’ inquiry could be watered-down or scrapped entirely should Liz Truss come to power.

The news comes following fresh legal advice to the Prime Minister by Lord Pannick QC, a top lawyer brought in by Mr Johnson to represent the government.

In a 22-page summary of events, he said the investigation into Partygate was ‘fundamentally flawed’ and ‘wrong in principle’.

Lord Pannick accused MPs on the Privileges Committee of ‘proposing to adopt an unfair standard’ by allowing anonymous witnesses to give testimony.

The summary adds that if not for parliamentary privilege, which grants legal immunity, the inquiry would be found ‘unlawful’ and subject to a judicial review.

The legal advice cost the government £129,700 of taxpayer money, and is expected to be used as proof of the inquiry’s illegitimacy by a group of backbench Tories hoping to convince MPs to axe the investigation.

It comes as several key allies of Ms Truss called for a major rethink of the investigation as they launched fresh attacks on the privilege committee this week.

Leader of the House Mark Spencer MP claimed ‘democracy will die’ if the investigation goes ahead in its current form.

He said it was ‘completely possible’ to find time in parliament to debate the motion and either water down its terms or scrap it entirely.

His views were echoed by Culture Secretary Nadine Dorries, who said Pannick’s legal advice ‘shows that the inquiry was a biased, Kafkaesque witch-hunt’.

The Cabinet minister called for it to be ‘halted now before it does any more damage’.

An early day motion to scrap the partygate inquiry put forward by Sir William Cash MP has also been supported by former Tory leader Iain Duncan Smith, a close Truss ally.

Ms Truss herself is reportedly ‘aware of the issue’ but ‘is not going to commit herself’ to action at this stage, a close ally has said.

Lord Pannick is one of the UK’s most senior lawyers, and his ruling is bolstered by the fact he has been a longstanding opponent of Boris Johnson in court.

In 2019, he represented Gina Miller in the Supreme Court case that ruled Mr Johnson had unlawfully prorogued Parliament.

At the time, he told the court that no PM had ‘abused his powers in the manner in which we allege’ in at least 50 years.

Yet he warns that if the investigation proceeds in its current form the consequences could be felt for years to come.

The Privileges Committee is currently examining whether Mr Johnson misled the Commons when he said ‘all guidance was followed in Number 10’ and that there was ‘no party’ in Downing Street during lockdown.

If found guilty he could be barred from being an MP and forced to stand down, triggering a by-election.

Discussions about the inquiry’s future are set to take place early next week, with former minister David Jones MP claiming there ‘may well be that there will be an early parliamentary procedure,’ following the meeting.

A spokesperson for the Privileges Committee said: ‘The committee notes the publication of Lord Pannick’s advice relating to its current inquiry.

‘The committee will meet in due course to consider in detail Lord Pannick’s arguments and will issue a response when it has done so.’

Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at [email protected].

For more stories like this, check our news page.

Source: Read Full Article