91Èȱ¬

Could voters in be asked to go back to the ballot box?

It would be an extraordinary political development based on what happened in the last few days of the general election campaign.

To be fair, it's a constituency well used to dirty politics, and one the were expecting to take.

Labour's fought strenuously to hold the seat. And he won an impressive victory, albeit by just 103 votes.

But were the tactics too vicious?

In the last few days of the campaign, put out a small newspaper which was predominantly an attack on their Liberal Democrat opponent, .

Mr Watkins believes the leaflet falsely portrayed him as a politician courting votes from militant Muslims; not a group known to be particularly supportive of British democracy.

"Why are the extremists urging a vote for Watkins?" asked Labour.

Still-undecided voters had the option to read the backpage which moved onto financial matters.

This reported Mr Watkins to be personal assistant to Saudi Arabian billionaire, Sheikh Abdullah Ali Alhamrani.

It helpfully pointed out: "Political donations from overseas are illegal. Even the Ashcroft money can't match a Sheikh."

It was not entirely clear what Sheikh Abdulah's interest would have been in Oldham East and Saddleworth. But putting that to one side, the clear impression was that Middle East money was oiling the Lib Dem campaign.

Such an arrangement would have been illegal.

Presumably Labour has some evidence for these serious allegations. But I haven't seen it and Mr Watkins denies being anything other than a full UK taxpayer.

Partly this has arisen because of suspicions about the extensive Lib Dem campaign which put out about half a million leaflets.

Labour believes their opponents must have spent about £200 thousand, far higher than the legal limit. The Lib Dems deny that and say they printed their own leaflets.

During the campaign Mr Watkins was questioned by 91Èȱ¬ Newsnight, after a Lib Dem party worker, Rebecca McGladdery, claimed she was being paid less than the minimum wage and in cash.

But since then HM Revenue and Customs has decided there is no case to answer.

These allegations may well have killed the Lib Dem campaign. But Mr Watkins is hoping they will also resurrect it.

He has petitioned the Royal Courts of Justice, asking for a rarely convened Election Court to sit and judge whether there should be a second ballot.

He argues not only that the allegations were serious and false but that Mr Woolas knew that to be the case.

In legal language, the Liberal Democrats are claiming that Labour breached Section 106 of the Representation of the People Act, 1983.

In ordinary language, the Liberal Democrats are claiming that Labour lied to the electorate.

The last time an Election Court ordered the rerun of a Parliamentary election was in Winchester in 1997. But that was due to a technicality. The last time there was a rerun due to corruption was in 1911 in Ireland. So this will be a difficult case for the Lib Dems to win.

Interestingly the only party to substantially gain votes at this election was the Conservative party which did not appear to indulge in negative campaigning.

The Tory candidate, Kashif Ali, who perhaps handily is a barrister himself, gained an extra 9% of the vote and has effectively turned the constituency into a three-way marginal.

He was unhappy with the behaviour of both his opponents and has described this latest legal move as: "Mr Pot suing Mr Kettle."

But Mr Kettle has much more to lose.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• |
• |
• - What's this?