BORIS Johnson has been referred to the police complaints body to assess whether he should face a criminal investigation over his links with American businesswoman Jennifer Arcuri.
The Greater London Authority (GLA) said its monitoring officer had recorded a "conduct matter" against Johnson over allegations Arcuri received favourable treatment because of her friendship with him while he was mayor of London.
The Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) will now consider whether there are grounds to investigate the Prime Minister for the criminal offence of misconduct in public office.
The move was greeted with fury in Downing Street, which denounced the referral as a "nakedly political put-up job" on the eve of the Tory Party conference in Manchester.
A senior Government source claimed no evidence had been provided to support the allegations, and that the Prime Minister had been given no opportunity to respond prior to the release of a GLA press statement late on Friday.
"Due process has not been followed and the timing is overtly political. The public and media will rightly see through such a nakedly political put-up job," the source said.
In a statement, the GLA said that the monitoring officer, Emma Strain, had a "statutory duty" to record any conduct matters which she became aware of relating to the mayor in his role as police and crime commissioner for London.
"The 'conduct matter' has been recorded as allegations have been brought to the attention of the monitoring officer that Boris Johnson maintained a friendship with Jennifer Arcuri and as a result of that friendship allowed Arcuri to participate in trade missions and receive sponsorship monies in circumstances when she and her companies could not have expected otherwise to receive those benefits," the statement said.
"A 'conduct matter' exists where there is information that indicates that a criminal offence may have been committed. It does not mean that this is proved in any way.
"The IOPC will now consider if it is necessary for the matter to be investigated."
Johnson has denied any wrongdoing in relation to his friendship with Arcuri.
A No 10 spokesman said: "The Prime Minister, as mayor of London, did a huge amount of work when selling our capital city around the world, beating the drum for London and the UK. Everything was done with propriety and in the normal way.”
Shadow chancellor John McDonnell tweeted: "It's important to note that this was a decision by the GLA monitoring officer, who is a completely, independent non-political official."
Labour Party chairman Ian Lavery said: "Boris Johnson has repeatedly failed to answer these very serious allegations of misuse of his public office, and he now faces the possibility of a criminal investigation.
"Johnson may be part of an establishment that thinks it doesn't have to abide by the same rules as everyone else, but the truth is catching up with him every day."
Earlier, Johnson said that he would comply with an order by the London Assembly to provide details of his links with Arcuri, although he insisted they were "barking up the wrong tree".
The referral to the IOPC is however another potential setback for the Prime Minister at the end of a tumultuous week which saw the Supreme Court rule that his controversial decision to suspend Parliament for five weeks was unlawful.
It follows a report by The Sunday Times that Arcuri, an American who moved to London seven years ago, was given £126,000 in public money and was treated to privileged access to three foreign trade missions led by Johnson while he was mayor.
The Government has since frozen a £100,000 grant to Arcuri's company, Hacker House, pending a review.
It is facing embarrassing questions about the verification process carried out before awarding the money.
Digital Minister Matt Warman told the Commons that his department had done the "usual due diligence" and that the company had a British phone number.
However, numerous reports said calls to the number were directed to an office in California, where Ms Arcuri, 34, is said to now be based.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel