Sir: The right of any 'scoundrelly MP to defame and
lie about a private citizen with- in the privileged chamber of the Commons and to get away with it' cited by Mr Joe Haines (Letters, 3 February) is an abuse that even a jumpy Prime Minister will stoop to when he is under pressure, as I know to my cost. Responding to a question from Peter Tapsell on 25 October 1994, suggest- ing that my revelations about the sleazy conduct of some government ministers amounted to 'blackmail', John Major gave credibility and worldwide publicity to this ludicrous allegation by saying he was refer- ring it to the Director of Public Prosecu- tions. The police investigated, the DPP reported and the Crown Prosecution Ser- vice issued a prompt statement that there was no evidence of any criminal offence and that further investigations were not warranted.
Since then, my repeated attempts to have the parliamentary record set straight have been fobbed off by the Speaker, who defends this denial of natural justice by quoting Article 9 of the Bill of Rights 1689, guaranteeing MPs' freedom of speech. I am entirely in favour of freedom of speech, but ordinary people who are deprived of the right to sue for libel when they are defamed in the Commons must be allowed the right to an apology and a correction in Hansard when false allegations are made under the cloak of privilege. If the Prime Minister had any idea of what honour meant, he would have acted by now, but I regret to report that of such considerations he is ignorant.
M Al Fayed
Chairman, Harrods, Knightsbridge, London SW1
Previous page
