Article 68 of the Elections (Jersey) Law 2002

2026.02.24

4.1   Deputy S.Y. Mézec of St. Helier South of the Chair of the Privileges and Procedures Committee regarding fraudulent election expenses. (OQ. 28/2026):

Will the Chair advise what consideration, if any, has been given to the appropriateness of Article 68 of the Elections (Jersey) Law 2002, which limits the time in which action can be brought in relation to potentially fraudulent election expenses returns to 12 months after the election?

Deputy S.M. Ahier of St. Helier North (Chair, Privileges and Procedures Committee):

P.P.C. (Privileges and Procedures Committee) has not given any specific consideration to this Article thus far, which was last amended in 2011, but having been made aware of interest in this matter I have added it to the next P.P.C.'s agenda, which will take place on 9th March.

4.1.1   Deputy S.Y. Mézec :

Does the Chair agree with me that because of the revelations which have come to light because of recent court proceedings, and the obviousness that there has been a breach of this particular law from at least one candidate at the most recent election, that it is vital that this matter is treated as seriously as possible to make sure that the public can have confidence in our election procedures and maintain a principle that elections must never be able to be bought?

Deputy S.M. Ahier :

In 2022 all submissions were reviewed in accordance with the provisions of the Public Elections (Expenditures and Donations) Law. This work was undertaken by members of the Electoral Authority along with the then Judicial Greffier. The reviewers checked the forms submitted by all candidates, including those who had been unsuccessful, to ensure that expenditure did not exceed the limits set out for Connétable s and Deputies at that time. The declaration submitted was signed by candidates and included a statement to the best of their knowledge and belief the information was true and correct. But I can confidently assure the Deputy that this matter is being taken seriously and will be reviewed by P.P.C., and I am sure by the Jersey Electoral Authority as well.

The Deputy Bailiff :

We come to the next Oral Question which Deputy Renouf will ask of the Minister for Infrastructure. Deputy J. Renouf of St. Brelade :

Before I ask the question, I would like to raise a point of order. I am sorry to do this in your first sitting. I would like to raise a point of order, under Standing Order 12, part (2A), in relation to Written Question 4/2026. I should say I do not necessarily expect this to be answered on the spot.

The Deputy Bailiff :

Sorry, which Written Question was it? Deputy J. Renouf :

It refers to Written Question 4. The Written Question asked the Chief Minister to provide information as far back as records allow relating to the number of high-value residents in the Island. The answer said: "The information requested in (a) and (b) is being validated by the relevant departments and will be provided to all States Members in advance of the debate on Deputy Renouf 's proposition to cap 2(1)(e) applications. I am just looking at my notes here, and I may have made a mistake on the numbering on that. It may be Written Question 18.

The Deputy Bailiff :

Yes, Written Question 4 is in fact ... Deputy J. Renouf :

Written Question 18, I do beg your pardon. So Written Question 18. Some figures were provided in the Ministerial comments paper relating to P.19, but these only went back to 2016 so I would argue that it is not possible to say you can partially answer a question which asks people to go back as far as records go; it is either answered or not answered.

The Deputy Bailiff :

Sorry, Deputy Renouf , Written Question 18, again it is a different question. It is for the Minister for Justice and Home Affairs concerning domestic abuse. Are you referring to Written Question 2 on the list?

Deputy J. Renouf :

I beg your pardon, Sir, I cannot understand how I have managed to get my questions so wrong, but it is. [Interruption]  It is 18? Written question 18.

The Greffier of the States:

But number 2 on the Order Paper.

The Deputy Bailiff :

On the Consolidated Order Paper, I think it is question 2. Deputy J. Renouf :

I do beg your pardon. In that case, it is numbered differently compared to how it was when it was submitted.

The Deputy Bailiff : Shall we start again? Deputy J. Renouf :

Shall we start again? I think we know the question that it is referring to. I am asking for a ruling because I do not believe that it has been answered. It asks for information to go back as far as records are held. I believe records are held well before 2016 for this information. As I say, I do not think it is possible to partially answer a question that asks for as far as records belong. It is either answered or not answered.

The Deputy Bailiff :

Thank you, Deputy . I have noted that. I do not have the answer to the Written Question in front of me so I will need to consider that and I will come back to you with an answer.

Deputy L.J. Farnham St Mary, St Ouen and St Peter:

May I just say that if we have erred in the answer, I would be pleased to revisit it and make sure we do answer the question fully.

The Deputy Bailiff :

Thank you, Chief Minister.

Deputy J. Renouf :

Shall I now ask the Oral Question?

The Deputy Bailiff :

I would be grateful if you did, Deputy Renouf , yes. Deputy J. Renouf :

It is a much simpler one.