Hacking phones of MPs could be contempt, inquiry concludes

This article was migrated from an old version of our website in 2025. As a result, it might have some low-quality images or non-functioning links - if there's any issues you'd like to see fixed, get in touch with us at info@journalism.co.uk.

There used to be something here that couldn't be migrated - please contact us at info@journalism.co.uk if you'd like to see this updated!

Hacking the phones of MPs could amount to contempt of parliament, according to an inquiry report by the select committee on standards and privileges.

The committee carried out an inquiry into the matter following a referral by the House of Commons in September last year , seeking evidence from the Clerk of the House and outside experts on parliamentary law.

The motion to refer was moved by MP Chris Bryant, who said he was concerned that we have only seen the "tip of the iceberg" when it comes to the hacking of politicians' phones. In today's report the committee concludes that a specific act of hacking could potentially be a contempt "if it can be shown to have interfered with the work of the House or to have impeded or obstructed an MP from taking part in such work".

The report adds that a series of acts of hacking could also potentially be a contempt if it can be shown that the hacking has interfered with the work of the House by creating a "climate of insecurity" for one or more MPs, although it adds that demonstrating a causal relationship between the two "might be difficult".

Within the report the term hacking also includes the act of 'blagging' under a definition of obtaining information which enables access to stored messages, such as through the impersonation of a person who is entitled to know the information.

The committee proposes that a draft privileges bil l, due to be published by the government in the present session of parliament, should include a definition of contempt of parliament and should also codify parliament's powers to impose sanctions, including a power for the House of Commons to fine.

The report adds that there should be no special provision made in law to provide MPs or parliament with remedies for phone hacking through the courts that are not available to other victims of hacking.

"We recommend that, in any matter such as hacking for which a remedy may be available in law, the House should normally expect all steps to be taken to obtain such a remedy before a motion is brought before the House to refer the matter to the Committee on Standards and Privileges for investigation as a possible contempt, save in exceptional circumstances, such as a failure on the part of the prosecuting authorities to act, or the existence of an immediate and severe threat to the working of parliament.

"We recommend that, in a case where a person has been acquitted by a court of a charge relating to a matter which may also amount to a contempt, such as hacking, no motion should be brought before the House to refer the matter to the Committee on Standards and Privileges, save in exceptional circumstances, such as the alleged involvement of a member in carrying out the hacking.

"We recommend that, in a case where a person has been convicted by a court of a charge relating to a matter which may also amount to a contempt, such as hacking, there should be a presumption that the House will exercise its own penal jurisdiction only when it is satisfied that to do so is essential."

Image by Christine Matthews . Some rights reserved.