Nigel Farage faces ‘kangaroo court’ over standards probe as committee's bias exposed

'Holders must act and take decisions impartially, fairly and on merit, using the best evidence and without discrimination or bias'

'Holders must act and take decisions impartially, fairly and on merit, using the best evidence and without discrimination or bias'

Members of the committee that could force Nigel Farage into a second by-election have previously made highly critical remarks about the Reform UK leader, prompting critics to brand the investigation a "kangaroo court".

The Committee is made up of seven Members of Parliament, as well as seven lay members, and will ultimately determine Mr Farage's fate if sanctions are recommended by the Standards Commissioner.

A GB News investigation has identified previous public statements by several members of the Standards Committee criticising Mr Farage, including one who criticised him for earning a salary from the People's Channel, branding it a "conflict of interest", while another reported Reform UK to the equalities watchdog over alleged Islamophobia.

The committee is governed by rules including the "Seven Principles of Public Life" from the MPs Code of Conduct, which states "holders of public office must act and take decisions impartially, fairly and on merit, using the best evidence and without discrimination or bias".

Members are expected to be able to comply with these rules irrespective of their political position or any previous criticism of members under investigation.

Yesterday, Mr Farage resigned as an MP to trigger a by-election he will stand in amid the two parliamentary investigations, but even if re-elected, he could still face yet another electoral battle in Essex depending on the probe's outcome.

One member of the committee, Michael Wheeler, was part of a group of Labour MPs that reported Reform UK to the equalities watchdog back in May for alleged "Islamophobia", claiming the party had breached the Equality Act – and Reform UK politicians and members made "comments that are clearly racist".

Liberal Democrat member of the Standards Committee, Anna Sabine, who also serves as her party’s media spokesman, has previously been highly critical of Mr Farage over his salary earned as a GB News presenter, branding it a "conflict of interest".

The very same MP had previously reported GB News to Ofcom for airing an investigation into migrant crime, although the media watchdog never investigated the complaint.

Another Labour committee member, Gill Furniss, previously shared a post from Labour claiming Mr Farage was "un-British" after he urged the United States to have "honest conversations" with the British government about free speech.

Meanwhile, Labour's Gareth Snell described Mr Farage’s position on Donald Trump’s war in Iran as "dangerous" and strongly criticised Reform UK's deportation plans as failing “every conceivable practical, legal and ethical test".

Parliament's own Code of Conduct says the standards system exists to ensure the public can have "justifiable confidence" in the House of Commons.

Critics say confidence is inevitably called into question when MPs who have publicly criticised Mr Farage are then asked to decide whether he breached parliamentary rules.

Speaking to Britain's News Channel, barrister and legal expert Steven Barrett said: “This investigation clearly exposes the potential for bias.

"If the Standards Committee wants to pretend they are playing judges, they need to recuse themselves.

“The British public need to demand better from the mother of all parliaments.

"This is another kangaroo court like the one that convicted Boris Johnson.

“This is one of the inherent flaws with Parliament trying to regulate its own membership.

"The constitutional decider of who is a Member of Parliament is ultimately the voters and that is why boycotting this by-election is offensive to the electorate.”

The Standards Commissioner is currently investigating the Reform UK leader over allegations he failed to declare a £5million gift from crypto billionaire Christopher Harborne, on top of claims he failed to declare financial support from financier George Cottrell.

Mr Farage could face sanctions from the committee as soon as September, including a potential suspension from Parliament that could lead to another by-election.

The Committee's published procedures require members with a personal interest in a case to withdraw from proceedings.

However, there is no express rule requiring members to recuse themselves because they have previously criticised the MP under investigation.

A Parliamentary Committee on Standards spokesman told GB News that "as a general rule", it was "unable to comment on the comments of members".