§ (Mr. Maurice Jones)
§ Mr. HooleyOn a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Earlier today I wished to put down Questions about the welfare of one of my constituents who is presently residing in the German Democratic Republic. Although the Table Office did not refuse the Questions, I was advised that since they might impinge on matters which could be sub judice—and since no ruling about this has yet been given—my Questions, together with Questions of other hon. Members, would, as it were, be put in suspension for the time being.
The two points that I wish to raise with you, Mr. Speaker, are, first, that it 1600 would help the House and hon. Members if we had a ruling from you about the sub judice rule with regard to this matter so that we may know whether we can put Questions on it. Secondly, and more importantly, can the House be given guidance as to how the supremacy of Parliament in a matter relating to the civil rights of individual citizens can be upheld in the light of this sub judice rule? It seems to me that too often the rule impinges on matters which should properly be raised in this House and which are prevented by the rule from being raised.
§ Mr. SpeakerThe hon. Gentleman and the House should be aware that hon. Members on both sides have sought either to put down Questions on this matter or to raise it under Standing Order No. 9. It is a difficult and complicated matter. I am anxious to serve the House in addition to protecting the rule to which the hon. Gentleman has referred. If the House will allow me, I shall make a statement tomorrow.