Can someone in the Party please look into the full judgement as it affects agents.
I refer to the fact that in it section 27 it states:
`Section 106 makes provision for the circumstances in which a person is liable for an illegal practice committed by his agent but, as we have already stated, the Respondent has accepted responsibility for the election addresses of which complaint is made in this petition. No submission was made on his behalf that any illegal practice alleged against him was not committed by him personally but by others on his behalf`
Am I right in thinking then that if the leaflet was agreed by the Candidate and the Agent then it is the Candidate that cops it? That an Agent is just that – someone if you like `employed` by the Candidate to sort out the finances, perhaps manage the campaign and agree with the Candidate the narrative of the campaign?
It’s crucially important that we bottom this out if we want Agents to come forward at future elections.
Or do we wait for new guidance by the Electoral Commission?
The candidate’s election can be voided if:
1) he commits the offence
2) his nominated Election Agent commits the offence
3) another person who is given the authority of the candidate or the agent commits the offence
The Louth case shows that, if 2) is true but the candidate is completely unaware and innocent of it, the election is voided but the candidate is not found guilty.
By: Noddy's Guide on November 7, 2010
at 4:52 pm
Thanks for that – so the party should be producing a form signed by the candidate to say that he/she is aware of the complete content of contentious leaflets and/or have an email trace?
By: John on November 7, 2010
at 6:11 pm
Also to explain this to all potential agents
By: John on November 7, 2010
at 6:12 pm