A COUNCILLOR will not be facing criminal proceedings after a police probe cleared him, it was revealed today.
But prominent Burnley councillor Mozaquir Ali may still face internal disciplinary proceedings from town hall bosses over claims he failed to declare a personal interest in a council matter.
Detective Sergeant Peter Simm, the man who carried out the investigation, said the Crown Prosecution Service had decided not to take action against the Liberal Democrat councillor and community leader.
"The decision was based on evidence of the matter prepared by us," he added.
Police and council officials have refused to say what the police inquiry centred on.
It is understood that Coun Ali, who was not available for comment today, has been informed of the decision.
But the Daneshouse ward representative could still face censure from his colleagues on Burnley council.
Last month he was the subject of the first hearing of the council's new standards panel on a charge of misconduct -- also related to an allegation that he failed to declare in council a personal interest in a matter under discussion.
Coun Ali failed to turn up at the town hall meeting where his solicitor gave reasons for his non-attendance and the hearing, under an independent chairman, went ahead without him.
A report on the outcome is expected to go to a private session of the council next week, after which a public statement on decisions made is expected.
Very limited censure action open to the council includes barring the leader of the powerful Community Forum group in Daneshouse from meetings of the relevant committee.
Fellow councillors on the panel, Ida Fowler, Conservative, Pat Bennett, Labour, Pat Chadwick Independent and Charles Bullas, LibDem, have been told not to discuss the matter.
The standards panel has been set up to uphold good conduct by members.
DS Simm said: "Our inquiry was in regard to an alleged failure by Coun Ali to disclose a particular interest in a council matter."
Burnley council officers have refused to say why they asked for a special standards panel to be set up last November -- the same time they complained to police.
A spokesman said non-disclosure was aimed at protecting the member until the matter was fairly dealt with.
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 hereComments are closed on this article