R6-3

`Trial' procedure in serious, contested cases 1. Where (a) the Parliamentary Commissioner finds a prima facie case against an accused MP, the alleged facts of which, if true, would amount to serious misconduct, but (b) the alleged facts are disputed by the accused MP, the Parliamentary Commissioner should report to the Committee on Standards and Privileges with a recommendation that the case be referred to a disciplinary tribunal consisting of a legal chairman sitting with either two or four MPs who should be of substantial seniority. 2. Before making a decision about whether to accept the Parliamentary Commissioner's recommendation, the Committee on Standards and Privileges should allow the accused MP an opportunity to make representations in respect of that decision. 3. If the Parliamentary Commissioner's recommendation is accepted, the accused MP should be provided with financial assistance to enable him or her to fund legal representation at the hearings of the tribunal. 4. The tribunal should be governed by procedures which satisfy the ``minimum standards of fairness'', as defined by the Nicholls Committee. 5. The tribunal should both act as fact-finder and decide whether, on the basis of the facts found, the charges against the accused MP are proved. 6. The tribunal should report its conclusions to the Committee on Standards and Privileges and, assuming no appeal is being lodged, the Committee should consider what penalty (if any) should be recommended to the House of Commons. 1 Sixth Report of the Committee on Standards in Public Life