conduct by members of relevant authorities in England’ (s.57(4)). It has appointed, as it
has power to do (s.57(5)(a)), ethical standards officers, to whom it must refer written
allegations which it considers should be investigated, that a member of a relevant
authority has failed, or may have failed, to comply with the authority’s code of conduct
(s.58(1) and (2)). S.59(1) enables an ESO to investigate not only a case referred to him
under s.58(2) but also other cases in which he considers that a member has failed or may
have failed to comply with the authority’s code of conduct and which have come to his
attention as a result of the investigation of the allegation referred to him. The purpose of
the investigation is to decide whether any of the findings mentioned in s.59(4) is
appropriate. These are:“(a) that there is no evidence of any failure to comply with the code of
conduct of the relevant authority concerned;
(b) that no action needs to be taken in respect of the matters which are the
subject of the investigation,
(c) that the matters which are the subject of the investigation should be
referred to the monitoring officer of the relevant authority concerned, or
(d) that the matters which are the subject of the investigation should be
referred to the Adjudication Panel for England for adjudication by a Tribunal
falling within s.76(1).”
A monitoring officer is appointed under the Local Government and Housing Act 1989
and one of his responsibilities is to bring a reference from an ESO following a finding
under section 59(4)(c) before the authority’s standards committee for consideration.
16.
Ss.60 to 67 of the 2000 Act contain detailed provisions setting out the procedures that
should be adopted by ESO’s in carrying out their functions. Although there were lengthy
submissions made to the Tribunal that the ESO had failed to comply with those
provisions in a number of respects, they have not been repeated before me and I do not
need to refer to those provisions.
17.
S.75(1) establishes the Adjudication Panel for England whose members are to be
appointed by the Lord Chancellor (now in accordance with the Constitutional Reform
Act 2005) and must possess ‘such qualifications as may be determined by the Lord
Chancellor’. S.79 deals with Tribunal decisions and requires them, by s.79(1), to decide
whether or not any person to which (sic) the matter upon which it is adjudicating relates
has failed to comply with the Code of Conduct of the relevant authority concerned. Its
powers, if it does so decide, include suspension or partial suspension for a maximum of
12 months (s.79(5)), disqualification for a maximum of 5 years (s.79(6) or notice to the
relevant authority that the member has failed to comply with its code of conduct,
specifying the details of that failure (s.79(7)).
18.
The order made under s.49 of the Act is The Relevant Authorities (General Principles)
Order 2001 (2001 No.1401). Paragraph 3 provides:“3(1). The Secretary of State hereby specifies in the Schedule to this Order,
the principles which are to govern the conduct of members of relevant
authorities in England …