Clarifying a Recent Online Misconception: Prison Sentences and Eligibility to Stand as an MP

By Jason KingBy Jason King

There has recently been a popular misconception circulating on social media thatif a person receives a prison sentence of more than 12 months, they permanently lose their eligibility to stand as an MP.if a person receives a prison sentence of more than 12 months, they permanently lose their eligibility to stand as an MP.

This misunderstanding is completely understandable, as the legal wording on the Electoral Commission’s website is ambiguous.

For the record:

• The banonly applies while a person is serving their sentenceonly applies while a person is serving their sentence.

•There is no permanent disqualificationThere is no permanent disqualificationfrom standing for political office.

• While criminal convictions are taken seriously, and an MP loses their seat if sentenced to more than 12 months, they are free to stand again after serving their sentence.

What the Law Actually SaysWhat the Law Actually Says

Under UK law, an individual is disqualified from standing as a candidate or serving as an MP if, at the time of nomination and polling day, they areserving a prison sentence of more than 12 months or are unlawfully at largeserving a prison sentence of more than 12 months or are unlawfully at large.

This is set out in theRepresentation of the People Act 1981Representation of the People Act 1981and is reflected in guidance from theElectoral CommissionElectoral Commission.

However,this disqualification only applies while the individual is in prisonthis disqualification only applies while the individual is in prison. Once they have completed their sentence and are no longer detained, theyregain full eligibility to stand for Parliamentregain full eligibility to stand for Parliament. There is no lifetime ban based on having previously served a sentence of more than 12 months.

Where the Confusion Comes FromWhere the Confusion Comes From

Thismisunderstanding is entirely reasonablemisunderstanding is entirely reasonable, given how theElectoral Commission’s guidance is wordedElectoral Commission’s guidance is worded. It states:

“You cannot be a candidate if at the time of your nomination and on polling day: You have been sentenced to a term of imprisonment or detained for a year or more and are detained anywhere in the UK, the Republic of Ireland, the Channel Islands or the Isle of Man, or are unlawfully at large.”“You cannot be a candidate if at the time of your nomination and on polling day: You have been sentenced to a term of imprisonment or detained for a year or more and are detained anywhere in the UK, the Republic of Ireland, the Channel Islands or the Isle of Man, or are unlawfully at large.”

The key phrase here is“and are detained.”“and are detained.”If this part is overlooked, it couldwrongly appearwrongly appearthat anyone who has ever been sentenced to over 12 months is permanently disqualified.

Amuch clearer way to phrase thismuch clearer way to phrase thiswould have been:

“You cannot be a candidate if you are currently serving a sentence of more than 12 months or are on the run.”“You cannot be a candidate if you are currently serving a sentence of more than 12 months or are on the run.”

This would make itimmediately clearimmediately clearthat the restrictiononly applies while a person is in prisononly applies while a person is in prison, not after their sentence has been served.

Why This Clarification MattersWhy This Clarification Matters

Misconceptions about electoral law can havereal consequencesreal consequences, fromdiscouraging potential candidatesdiscouraging potential candidatesto spreading false narratives about political eligibility.

While it isrightly the caserightly the casethat MPs who receivelong prison sentences are disqualified from officelong prison sentences are disqualified from office, the lawdoes not impose a permanent ban on standing for election after releasedoes not impose a permanent ban on standing for election after release.

This isnot a criticismnot a criticismof those who have misunderstood the rule—it’s an easy mistake to make, and the official guidance isnot as clear as it should benot as clear as it should be. However, for the sake of accuracy, it’s important to set the record straight.

Well, that’s all for now. But until our next article, please stay tuned, stay informed, but most of all stay safe, and I’ll see you then.Well, that’s all for now. But until our next article, please stay tuned, stay informed, but most of all stay safe, and I’ll see you then.

Jason KingJason King

Birmingham City-DeskBirmingham City-Desk

Twitter (X) @JasonKingNewsTwitter (X) @JasonKingNews

Jasonkingnews@gmail.comJasonkingnews@gmail.comJasonkingnews@gmail.com