Since the extensive lying in the Brexit Referendum Marcus J Ball has been trying to prosecute Boris Johnson for the offense of Misconduct in Public Office.
The case was initially successful, however when it reached the High Court it was shut down in what (at least from the outside) seemed like a very arbitrary and hasty fashion.
Mr Ball has since been investigating the circumstances and has produced evidence that at least to a non-legal-person seems fairly damning and has raised a formal Judicial Conduct Complaint.
Video explainer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtB42gP4lCg
The main points of complaint:
- Previously worked for Johnson (and received substantial sums of money) - including during the time period where one of the offenses took place
- Is a member of the same organisation "The Middle Temple"
- Is a member of the same private social club "The Garrick Club" along with the accused's father and multiple close political allies of Johnson. Many of whom are also involved in the original misconduct, if not direct targets of this private prosecution.
- Her husband works for a close ally of Johnson who is accused of the same offence
- Her Husband is a member of the same "Garrick Club" along with the accused.
- Is a member of the Privy Council along with both Johnson and many close allies of Johnson.
From the perspective of a non-lawyer this seems to stink. If I went to court and found out that the judge was previously in the employ of the other party, was a member of the same exclusive clubs, and members of the same committees I would not be happy. Even if no actual bias applied the appearance of it seems very strong here.
But how strong is the complaint in actual legal terms? Does it have any realistic prospect of getting anywhere and do the judges involved actually have a case to answer or is the complaint likely to just be summarily thrown out?