Minutes:
Preamble
A complaint was submitted regarding the alleged conduct of Councillor Atiqul Hoque, the Subject Member, of Salisbury City Council. The Monitoring Officer, in accordance with procedure, considered and accepted a request from the complainant that the complaint be presented anonymously.
The complaint related to allegations that the Subject Member had not informed the Standards Committee of his acting in multiple capacities, specifically in relation to alleged actions in his role with the Muslim Association of Salisbury (MAS). It was alleged that this was in breach of the Salisbury City Council Code of Conduct.
At the meeting the Sub-Committee, in applying the initial tests of the assessment criteria, found that the Subject Member was and remains a member of Salisbury City Council and that a copy of the relevant Code of Conduct was provided for the assessment.
The Sub Committee agreed that the Subject Member was not acting in their capacity as a member during the various alleged actions and therefore outside of the scope of the Standards Regime.
In reaching its decision, the Sub-Committee took into account the original complaint and supporting information, the response of the Subject Member, and the report of the Monitoring Officer.
The Sub-Committee also considered written statements from the Complainant and the Subject Member which were provided at the Assessment Sub-Committee meeting on 15 December 2022. Neither party was in attendance.
Discussion
The complaint related to several allegations which all involved the Subject Member’s role as Treasurer and the business of the MAS.
The Subject Member contends that the complaint has transpired due to fallings out between members of the MAS.
The Subject Member stated that he had received no financial benefit from his role within the MAS, or due to his elected role as a councillor or the deputy Mayor and had instead given personal funds to the MAS charity.
The Sub-Committee considered the allegations which were not supported by any evidence and agreed that they were not connected to the Subject Members role as an elected member and were therefore outside of the remit of the Standards regime and therefore was not subject to the Member Code of Conduct.
Conclusion
The Sub-Committee noted that the allegations appeared to have arisen due to an internal dispute between members of the MAS.
The Sub Committee found no evidence which supported the allegations relating to the Subject Member’s role as elected Member. However, the Sub Committee did recognise that it was not best practice to include reference to multiple roles, such as ‘Deputy Mayor’ in the electronic signature sign off for email accounts which were not connected to that role, as this could lead to misunderstanding.
In particular, the Sub-Committee noted that any allegations of wrongdoing regarding the registered charity of the MAS would be for the Charity Commission to investigate.
It was therefore,
Resolved:
In accordance with the approved arrangements for resolving standards complaints adopted by Council on 9 July 2019, which came into effect on 1 January 2020 and after hearing from the Independent Person, the Assessment Sub-Committee determined to dismiss complaint COC142903 with no further action.
With the note:
The Sub Committee noted that for clarity of a division between multiple roles it was advisable to have clearly separate email signatures to sign off correspondence, so not to give the impression that business from one was within the capacity of the other.