It's okay to lie to the people, rules court

So today we learn the reasons why Boris Johnson won't appear in court to answer for the use of false statistics in a referendum. There could, in principle, have been very good reasons why this won't happen. Are there ? No really, no.

The High Court said it was not proved Mr Johnson had been acting in a public office when claiming the NHS could get £350m extra a week after Brexit. Outlining their reasons on Wednesday, they said it was "not sufficient" to argue that Mr Johnson made "contentious and widely challenged" statements about Brexit and the NHS while he was an MP and London mayor and that this therefore represented a "breach of duty". They concluded it had not been demonstrated that Mr Johnson made the comments "as he discharged the duties of the office".

I do not understand how that can be. He was an MP and mayor running a political campaign. Surely, it is inherently part of the duties of the office of MP to run (or at least participate in) political campaigns, even if that is a somewhat voluntary duty. MPs don't have to campaign on every issue, but for those they do choose to participate in, I don't see how it can possibly be considered not to be part of their official duties.

They pointed out that Parliament had passed legislation to make it a criminal offence for anyone to make false statements about a candidate during a campaign for the purposes of stopping them being elected. But Parliament, they concluded, had "deliberately excluded" legislating to include false factual statements about statistics within the auspices of the criminal law. "Parliament twice made a choice not to do precisely that which the interested party now seeks to achieve," they ruled.

But that's mad ! Nay, not mad, disgusting. In what world can you have a sensible campaign based on lies ? None at all. Not for the first time do I feel that, personal issues notwithstanding, Britain deserves the kick in the teeth of a hard Brexit for its persistent and wilful stupidity.

Of course, BoJo's response is even more ludicrous :

Mr Johnson's legal team argued that the offence of misconduct in public office should be about the secret abuse of power and there was nothing secret about the £350m claim, which they said had been challenged during the campaign.

Which is so contemptibly stupid. So it's okay to lie as long as it's in public, is it ? That's insane.

At least the prosecution are sensible and not defeated quite yet :

"You cannot have an MP, a public office-holding MP, on TV speaking to millions of people lying about how the public purse is being used," he told the BBC... Mr Ball said he still believed Mr Johnson's actions constituted "an abuse of public trust" and he was "slightly concerned there has not been the level of engagement with our written submissions that I have would have preferred". 

"Our legal argument is that Mr Johnson was carrying out several duties of an MP," he added. "Why do we elect MPs? One of the things they are responsible for is determining what happens to public money, where it goes, how it is spent, meaning they have authority and expert knowledge when it comes to the public purse." 

Mr Ball, who crowd-funded more than £300,000 to bring the case, said he would consult with his legal team before deciding whether it was appropriate to appeal against the ruling.

Johnson accuser may appeal '£350m claim' ruling

A man who took Boris Johnson to court over claims he lied during the 2016 EU referendum says he could continue with his private prosecution despite judges ruling it had no legal justification. Marcus Ball said he would "keep going" and appeal against the judgement if his lawyers advised him to do so.