Well what a surprise, Margaret Ferrier,  MP for the SNP is going to be prosecuted (see https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/jan/04/scottish-mp-margaret-ferrier-arrested-over-alleged-covid-rule-breach) whilst Dominic Cummings, Private Citizen protected by Prime Minister Johnson is going to get away with his lockdown breach escape to Durham scot free! 

When we wrote to the Metropolitan Police back in August they responded with the letter enclosed below.  In particular in para's 2 and 3 they state:

....I can confirm that an assessment has been made of all the information available and there will be no Metropolitan Police investigation at this time. 

Where the Metropolitan Police Service (‘MPS’) receives allegations of breaches of the Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions)(England) Regulations 2020, the MPS focuses on those that are live or ongoing where police action can enable a change to behaviour that is posing a current public health risk.   

So what exactly is the difference in dealing with the way that Police forces deal with these two high profile public figures? 

We can't give up now.

Martin

Dear Supporter.

We have received notification from the Appeal Court that they have not granted me permission to proceed. I enclose the ruling for reference. Having discussed this with our legal team, who have researched the subject, we can only concede that there seems to be no further formal proceeding we can take to persuade the DPP to take action along with the Metropolitan Police.

In the ruling, the Judge, Lord Justice Dingemans decided this was not a case to allow the appeal because there has now been referral to the Metropolitan police to request an investigation that may provide an alternate remedy for the rule of law. We must hope the Met conducts a thorough investigation now on the movements in London when Cummings commenced his journey and, indeed before that time when he visited his office whilst likely to be infected; and does not suffer the same failings of the report by Durham Police which found an offence in Durham but failed to refer that offence to the DPP. If following the Met investigation no action is taken then a possible challenge to that will fall to be considered. However I am pleased that the court accepted jurisdiction which is important for other cases and a small but significant gain and the rule of law point was recognised    

I am now consulting with my legal team about possible ways forward, the challenge for an ordinary citizen to take action against a miscreant bearing in mind that the Covid emergency legislation seems to preclude this pathway.

Much of Public opinion and the Press is still accusing Cummings of breaking the trust of the public and undermining good governance. Even now after all these months it is reported that  200 British skiers in Verbiers scarpered in the night to avoid quarantine as ordered by Swiss authorities. But it remains that no action has been taken by the authorities over Cummings' main breach at the start in London which has set the tone ......not just his action and public mea culpa, but the turning of a blind eye by the key police authority and public prosecutor.

I am now consulting with my legal team about possible ways forward, the challenge for an ordinary citizen to take action against a miscreant bearing in mind that the Covid emergency legislation seems to preclude this pathway.   

We are not giving up just yet. Any ideas that you may have will be gratefully received, especially if you feel that you have been affected by Cummings' actions back in March..

Thanks for all your support. We are not giving up just yet.

Martin

Today in Prime Minister's Questions Keir Starmer challenged the PM over his Covid-19 policies and loss of public trust, saying  significantly "We all know what the tipping point was - the 520 mile road trip to Barnard Castle and the humiliating way in which the PM and his cabinet chose to defend it".  He also asked how the PM could justify a £40,000 pay rise given to Dominic Cummings over the last year when he and his Chancellor are telling the armed forces, police officers, care workers and firefighters that they will have a pay freeze.  It seems there is one rule for key workers and another for Govt. Spads.

Not only that but at last weeks BBC Question time, Robert Buckland MP, Justice Secretary,, when asked by host Fiona Bruce, if he thought Cummings had broken the rules, said:  "It was a deeply unfortunate episode and it didn't help when creating a consistent message [on compliance with the rules]".  This is the first time a government minister has acknowledged this since Penny Mordaunt had said there were "inconsistencies" in Cummings' account and apologised to her constituents for how the incident "undermined key public health messages". https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/dec/10/top-tory-says-dominic-cummingss-trip-was-deeply-unfortunate

Furthermore, in relation to Cummings peremptory sacking of Sonia Khan https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/dec/15/johnson-wasted-public-money-over-adviser-sacked-by-dominic-cummings Counsel for Khan argued that "what Cummings had done personally, rather than just as an agent of the employer, was actionable."  The implication of this seems to be that as a private citizen, even though he was at the centre of government, he shouldn't be protected against personal transgressions.  

Our case follows from Cummings' [apparent] breach of lockdown rules as referenced by Keir Starmer in PMQs.  We continue with determination so that justice is seen to be done.  We still await a determination for an Appeal Court hearing. Your support is gratefully received to enable our case to be viable. 

An application for permission to Appeal the decision of the High Court was lodged in the registry of the Court of Appeal on 9th November 2020.  

It has taken some courage on our part to go forward with this, particularly in view of the pushbacks to our case to date.  However,  our legal team believe there are solid grounds for appeal and that our case raises major issues of public importance, specifically:

-the role of the DPP

- adherence to the rule of law

- public confidence in the rule of law; and

- Seeking to ensure DPP free to make independent decisions without undue influence

We would appreciate all the support we have been given to date and welcome further support to enable us to pursue this with vigour.

Dear Supporters,

Our Judicial Review application in the DPP/Cummings case in High Court today was Refused. I don’t know, and I don't think my legal  team know what to do yet,  until we get the Judges’ written reasons for the decision, later this week. Our  feeling is that the decision was already made before our Counsel got to his feet and we lost on a technicality. The main points being addressed outside the massive document submissions, centred on the DPPs duty and power using clear and unambiguous  arguments as to why the original High Court judge had previously been wrong in his written ruling..  

Michael Mansfield QC was brilliant, making our case and answering Judges’ questions for forty minutes. The opposing counsel for the DPP hardly said anything, just relying on the original submission in the High Court and the judge's original ruling.  Naturally we were disappointed with the result.

This hearing was in the Divisional Court presided over by an Appeal Court judge sitting with a High Court judge. There might be the possibility of an Appeal. However, I am still trying to consider if there is any way of taking action directly against Cummings,  now that we have established the principle that the DPP won't stand in our way and try to block us in the attempt.

The good news is that the Judge refused an application for the DPP to escalate their costs above the minimum appropriate to the actions to date.

Thanks to our diligent and valiant legal team. I am very grateful for the many hours late into the night and all the advice and support that they have provided over the months leading up to this hearing.

Finally, thanks to our supporters...this isn’t over yet and therefore any additional funds that we can raise will give us confidence to carry on until the lockdown avoider is brought to book.

Martin

We are now on the final run up to the hearing in the Royal Courts of Justice on 3rd November at 2.00 pm. The proceedings will be ‘in person’, not virtual. So our team will be appearing face to face with the Government’s lawyers. We hope that there will be a live stream so that you can all watch on line. Watch this space for more updates when we get them.

There are only 12 days now till our case is heard on 3rd November.  We are very grateful for all the support received to date.  We believe that on the basis of the work our legal team has done to date that in all fairness we should succeed and be permitted to go to the next stage of a Judicial Review.

The hearing is open to all...live streamed ......we appear on a remote platform and will let you know the details when we are informed of them.

Costs have accumulated as a consequence of the pushbacks we have had.  If it is possible you can contribute further to help us get to our target, we would be so grateful and either way please encourage others you know to support us.

Many thanks

Martin and team

It is hard to escape the conclusion that there is one rule for Dominic Cummings and Tory MP's who break the Covid rules and another for everyone else.  In this last week SNP MP Margaret Ferrier travelled to and from Westminster with Covid-19 symptoms.  She has been vilified for doing so, has had the whip suspended and has referred herself to the Parliamentary Standards Committee and to the police for investigation.  She accepted that what she did was inexcusable and apologised.  She has been urged to resign.  She may yet do so although may await the outcome of the investigations being conducted.  

The cases are comparable.  But Dominic Cummings did not apologise, he made excuses for his behaviour.  He was protected by the PM and cabinet members who tweeted their support for him and sought to brush the matter under the carpet.  Many of these conservative MP's, apart from those who have gone mysteriously quiet, have vociferously condemned Margaret Ferrier. There has been no substantive investigation into Dominic Cummings actions in Parliament or by the police (aside from the hasty review by Durham police that ignored the main breaches of the lockdown rules).  

The case of Margaret Ferrier has brought the conversation back to Dominic Cummings.  

Martin Redston

At long last we have a Court date. A ‘Remote Hearing ‘ will be held on 3rd November 2020. Put the date in your diary because we are hoping that this will be a public Hearing so you will all be able to see our brilliant legal team, headed by Michael Mansfield QC in action. This is an important hearing in which we intend to ensure that the Director of Public Prosecutions and The Police are persuaded to carry out their duty and investigate Cummings  for breaking lockdown rules back in March. In the long run we intend to ensure that he is prosecuted for ignoring Government rules that the rest of us were observing in the worst weeks of the pandemic.

Please keep spreading the word and asking people to support our cause through the excellent Crowd Justice platform.

We are now awaiting our date for a Court Hearing. We assume that this will be after the Summer recess, so possibly September if we are lucky and the court backlog isn’t too great. We will let you know as soon as we are informed.

In the meantime, please keep spreading the word.

Thanks for your support.

Martin

We're still pressing on with vigour in the High Court.  We've had a couple of knockbacks as you would expect.  Our ace legal team has now filed further documentation with compelling reasons to move on up the chain to a full hearing.

It becomes more important than ever to raise the funding effort to meet costs that may be incurred at each stage of this public interest case.

Please support.

We’re waiting for the judge to get back to us to make a decision about whether we can go ahead with our Judicial Review or not.  Whilst we wait, the issue is as important as ever given how the Covid situation changes from day to day and the “Cummings” effect contributes to some sectors of the community not bothering to maintain social distancing. It is a prime national health danger.

This Article of 14th April has just been brought to my attention  (https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/apr/14/man-wrongly-convicted-under-coronavirus-law-met-police-admit?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other).    I note particularly that Max Hill, the DPP, had said the at the beginning of lockdown that “We recently launched our interim charging protocol where we set out that any offending related to coronavirus will be treated as the highest priority, and we will not hesitate to bring offenders to justice.”

The highest priority!  How come there is one law for them and another law for the rest of us? 

The Wheels of Justice grind slowly.  We've done all we can to advance the process.   If we could do more we would.  On 16th June, after about 10 days of correspondence with the DPP, we filed comprehensive grounds for a Judicial Review of the DPP's inaction in relation to alleged breaches of the lockdown rules by Dominic Cummings that so outraged the public and Press when disclosed at the end of May.

The DPP acknowledged the claim and contested it on 1st July and our legal team replied with a detailed and robust rebuttal on 5th July.  So it is now for the Judge to decide on all these voluminous papers whether to give permission for the Judicial Review to proceed.  We think it would only be right he should do so.

How long might it be before we get a decision?  Hard to say.  We know the courts are struggling under the weight of many unheard cases.  We know that the summer recess is coming soon.  We believe our case to be a matter of urgent public interest in a continuing public health crisis.  As soon as we hear anything from the Judge we will update this page and let all our supporters know.

We are still raising money for the case.  We have already had to pay court costs.  The DPP have told us what their costs would be if we end up having to pay them and our legal team have been obliged to inform the court and the DPP what our costs are likely to be.  This all adds up.  

Every contribution made is highly valued by us.  Each donation represents the continuing anger in the country that those at the heart of government may interpret the rules at their convenience whilst so many have complied whilst struggling with the loss of family members and loved ones or simply the difficulties of managing in a lockdown situation.

My lawyers have quickly produced a very comprehensive and robust response to the DPP’s Acknowledgment (which sought to kick the issue further into the long grass) and this has now been filed with the High Court.

Our request for a Judicial Review gives rise to major issues of public importance, specifically:

- adherence to the rule of law

- public confidence in the rule of law

- the role of the DPP; and 

- Seeking to ensure DPP free to make independent decisions without undue influence

We now wait for a judge to consider giving permission to proceed.

Please keep up the good work and spread the word widely.

We've now received an acknowledgment from the Government to our case and will have a detailed update soon.

Watch this space.

For Information:

Young law graduate fundraising for legal advice for private prosecution of Dominic Cummings posted following update on her GoFundMe page:

"We have liaised with other legal teams concerned with the prosecution of Dominic Cummings. The teams have recognised that some of our approaches have led to duplication of work. Having assessed the approach of other teams we are content for they to carry on in their pursuit of a prosecution of Mr Cummings for breach of section 6 of the Covid Regulations using their more advanced approach. Our legal team are now focusing resources towards establishing whether other criminal offences have been committed by Dominc Cummings and whether those offences may be pursued by way of private prosecution. A further legal advice exploring these issues will follow shortly."

Boris Johnson referred today to "people taking too many liberties with the guidance" . He's right but previously said Dominic Cummings did the right thing when he apparently "took liberties" and "relied on "his instincts" when we were in strict lockdown.  

Thank you to each and every supporter for your valuable contribution.  We are still fundraising.  So please join our supporters and donate what you can to help.

Thank you so much to each and every supporter of the case.  The clock is ticking. The DPP have a standard 21 days to respond.  It will go quickly and gives us time to maximise the fundraising.  To help I suggest supporters email friends asking them to support, tweet in support and follow @InvestigateDom.  I've received lots of encouragement from supporters and some have shared particular reasons for supporting.  One heartrending example is:  "I have a relative who was in the exact same circumstances as Cummings but she was in a life/death situation and still STAYED AT HOME as she was told."  

My lawyers have today lodged proceedings in the High Court to seek an urgent judicial review of the Director of Public Prosecution’s inaction over the alleged breaches of the Coronavirus Regulations by Dominic Cummings. One particular concern is the so-called ‘Cummings effect’ or ‘Cummings defence’ which has meant that people who previously were complying with the Regulations have sought not to adhere to them fully. Grounds include complaint of lack of appearance of independence to DPP's decision making.