R v Chaytor and others [2010] EWCA Crim 1910, [2010] All ER (D) 335 (Jul)
Parliamentary privilege or immunity from criminal prosecution had never attached to ordinary criminal activities by members of Parliament. With the necessary exception in relation to the exercise of freedom of speech, it was difficult to envisage circumstances in which the performance of the core responsibilities of a member of Parliament might require or permit him or her to commit a crime, or in which the commission of crime could form part of the proceedings in the House of Commons for the purposes of Art 9 of the Bill of Rights.
Equally, it could not be discerned from principle or authority that privilege or immunity in relation to which such conduct might arise merely because the allegations were based on activities which had taken place “within the walls” of Parliament. The defendants in the instant case were alleged to have taken advantage of the allowances scheme designed to enable them to perform their important public duties as members of Parliament to commit crimes of dishonesty to which Parliamentary immunity or privilege did not, had
