by A former Conservative cabinet minister under pressure from a lobbying row has asked Sir Keir Starmer to let him have his day in court.
Owen Paterson broke his silence three years after leaving politics when the parliamentary standards committee recommended he should be suspended for 30 days.
A panel of MPs concluded in November 2021 that Mr Paterson had repeatedly lobbied for clinical diagnostics company Randox and food manufacturer Lynn’s Country Foods.
Prime minister Boris Johnson then tried to delay Mr Paterson’s suspension by introducing a new committee with its own appeals process but a rebellion by Tory backbenchers left him in a quandary.
Mr Paterson has now written to the Prime Minister asking to be allowed to challenge the committee’s findings, which are protected by parliamentary privilege, in court.
In his letter to Sir Keir, he claimed there was “not a scrap of evidence” against him and that 17 supporting witnesses would be able to prove his innocence “beyond doubt”.
Mr Paterson wrote: “There was, and still is, no appeal against the committee’s findings. These are protected by parliamentary privilege.
“My life has been turned upside down by a process that has completely disregarded natural justice. I have been stripped of any right to testify or object and my representatives are prohibited from speaking on my behalf.
“I am writing to request that you use your offices to waive parliamentary privilege in this matter and therefore allow me to bring my case before the courts and expose the allegations against me to a judicial process which We both respect him.”
Kathryn Stone, the parliamentary standards commissioner at the time of Mr Paterson’s case, found that the former environment secretary “repeatedly used his position as an MP to promote companies that paid him”. .
Ms Stone’s supporters argued strongly at the time against any suggestion of wrongdoing in the case.
The standards committee’s final report said: “Mr Paterson’s lobbying breaches were so serious and numerous that they damaged public confidence in the House and its members.”
Mr Paterson’s plea to Sir Keir came ahead of the release of a new documentary called Justice? The story of Owen Paterson.
In the half-hour film, Mr Paterson claimed the standards committee was “out to get me” and suggested the panel targeted him because he was a “big dog Brexeer”.
“I just want to have my day in court, that’s what I’m asking for,” he said.
“If I go down there, I’ll at least be happy that justice has been seen. But I don’t want anyone else to go through what me and my family have gone through.”
Mr Paterson has previously insisted that the investigation into his conduct played a “large role” in the 2020 suicide of his wife, Rose.
He also denied allegations that he helped Randox get a Covid-133 million contract.
Philip Barden, Mr Paterson’s lawyer, said Mr Paterson was right to inform the Food Safety Agency about the contamination of milk and ham by banned substances which could cause cancer.
Sir Iain Duncan Smith, who approved the committee more than two decades ago, told the documentary: “Of course I can be criticized for saying this, but I don’t think it’s that open or tough and it was then.”
Rory Stewart – who was met by Mr Paterson in his ministerial role at the time to explain how the medical equipment used to save people in the third world was not working properly – will also be seen being defended.
“I don’t believe what he did would constitute lobbying. He confirmed that he was a consultant, that he obviously worked for a company that did blood testing,” said Mr Stewart.
“I did not feel that he did anything different to what I saw the Members doing all the time and I thought that the whole meeting was held under the correct rules and civil servants were present.
“We followed due process and I felt very sad that his name was being blackened in that way.”
Parliamentary sources said there was no power to waive Article 9 of the Bill of Rights and noted that the standards committee had a Tory majority at the time of the investigation into Mr Paterson.
They also said the European Court of Human Rights had thrown out Mr Paterson’s case.
The Standards Committee and the Office of the Standards Commissioner were contacted for comments.
