BORIS Johnson’s decision to stick with Priti Patel despite bullying accusations is to be the subject of a High Court legal challenge.
The FDA union launched judicial review proceedings in February over the Prime Minister’s move last year to disregard the findings of his adviser on ministerial standards in order to back the Home Secretary.
The case is due to be heard by Lord Justice Lewis and Justice Steyn at the Royal Courts of Justice in London on Wednesday.
In an investigation into Patel’s behaviour, published in November, Sir Alex Allan found she had not always treated civil servants with “consideration and respect”.
He concluded that Patel’s behaviour, which was said to include some occasions of shouting and swearing, met the definition of bullying adopted by the Civil Service.
READ MORE: Home Office spent more than £370k to settle Priti Patel bullying claim
Allan left his advisory role in Downing Street after Johnson contradicted his advice by judging that Patel did not breach the ministerial code Ministers are usually expected to resign if they breach the code but Johnson, who is its arbiter, judged Patel had not fallen foul of the rules – and that is the decision being challenged by the FDA.
The FDA general secretary, Dave Penman, whose union represents senior public servants, said earlier this month that Johnson’s decision was “extraordinary” and that civil servants’ confidence in challenging unacceptable behaviour from ministers had been “fatally damaged”.
He said: “We are asking the court to rule that the Prime Minister misdirected himself. This is not about forcing the Home Secretary to face sanctions, that is a matter for the Prime Minister, this is simply about how the ministerial code is interpreted.”
Following the publication of Sir Alex’s report, Patel issued an “unreserved, fulsome apology” and said there were “no excuses” for what happened.
The hearing is due to start at 10.30am and expected to last two days.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel