A state MP has been found guilty of theft and dishonesty — will he stay in parliament?

After a three-month trial, and years facing and fighting charges, South Australian state MP Troy Bell has not eluded the long arm of the law.

The parliamentarian was last night found guilty, by a jury, of 20 counts of theft and five counts of dishonest dealing with documents.

In the seven years since he was accused of stealing $430,000 from not-for-profit educational organisations, Bell has represented the lower house seat of Mount Gambier, at first as a Liberal and then as an independent, and was twice re-elected in that time.

But the guilty verdict has led to unanswered questions not only about the fate of Bell, but of his electorate, including whether he will stay in parliament, and whether his constituents will be returning to the polls for a by-election.

Will Troy Bell be expelled from parliament?

According to public law expert John Williams, the legislation that deals with that particular question is the state’s Constitution Act, which “allows for a vacancy” under certain circumstances.

Professor Williams said the constitution set out “disqualifications” which prohibited a sitting member from retaining office. 

Those circumstances include an MP taking an oath of allegiance to “any foreign prince or power”, becoming of “unsound mind”, or committing treason.

“[But] the one that we are focused on here is if someone is convicted of an indictable offence — and that goes to the seriousness of the charges which have been found,” Professor Williams told ABC Radio Adelaide.

Section 31 of South Australia’s constitution states that if “any member” of the House of Assembly (ie the lower house) is:

“… convicted of an indictable offence … the member’s seat in the House of Assembly shall thereby become vacant.”

While Bell’s offences are considered “indictable”, he has not yet been convicted — that is something that would happen at sentencing.

Bell, who has represented the regional seat in the state’s south-east since being elected in 2014, was tight-lipped about the possibility of an appeal when asked outside court and has since been contacted by the ABC for comment.

He has 28 days to lodge an appeal.

But Professor Williams said that expulsion from the house would not be “automatic”, and that parliament had a degree of discretion over Bell’s immediate fate as an MP.

“That becomes a matter for the house to hear,” he said.

“That’s partly why it’s not automatic. It’s now [in] the hands of the house to make a determination.”

Will there be a by-election?

The answer to the question of whether Mount Gambier voters will be going back to the polls very much depends on the previous answer, but the constitution leaves it somewhat open-ended:

“Whenever any question arises respecting any vacancy in either House of Parliament it shall be heard and determined by the House in which the vacancy occurred,” it states.

The first opportunity SA parliament’s lower house will have to consider the latest development in the Bell case is Tuesday, October 15.

But Treasurer Stephen Mullighan has already indicated the government will wait for Bell to make a decision about whether he will appeal before parliament considers taking further steps.

“This has been an extraordinarily long and drawn-out legal process,” he said.

“It’s obviously a very substantial thing when a member of parliament has such a verdict handed down against them.

“You can, of course, imagine the bind that the parliament would find itself in if it rushed forward to make a decision, only to have Mr Bell pursue an appeal and be vindicated at the end of that process — that would be an untenable position both for Mr Bell and for the parliament.”

What’s happened in the past?

The government’s stance is in line with the current situation regarding Liberal MP Fraser Ellis, who has been found guilty of four counts of deception over his misuse of the Country Members Accommodation Allowance, but has launched an appeal and remains in parliament.

“It’s not for me to speak on behalf of what the parliament might decide to do,” Mr Mullighan said.

“But I think what we’ve seen with Fraser Ellis is that when a member is in this position and they’ve indicated that they’re considering pursuing an appeal, that the house has given them time to consider that and potentially go through that process.”

According to Professor Williams, the Bell case “is a rare event” — but if Bell were eventually evicted, he would not be the first MP to be forced out of parliament following a guilty verdict.

“We have had circumstances here in South Australia before where a member was under charges,” Professor Williams said.

“I’m thinking of [the case of] former member of the legislative council Bernard Finnigan, where it was going through appeals and different processes.”

But there were different circumstances in the case of the disgraced Labor MP — who was handed a suspended jail sentence after he was found guilty of obtaining access to child exploitation material.

Finnigan was an MP in the upper — rather than lower — house, and eventually quit parliament after coming under pressure from then-premier Jay Weatherill.

“Ultimately he resigned from his seat prior to the house expelling him,” Professor Williams said.

How have Mount Gambier locals responded?

People spoken to by the ABC on Mount Gambier’s main street have said Bell should not continue to sit in parliament.

“I don’t think he should be in that position at all,” Arielle Fullford, 33, said.

“I don’t think that’s someone who should be a leader of our town.”

Don Winton, 96, said he should pay the penalty for his crimes.

“You expect honest people to be there, not crook people,” he said.

Anne Marcinkowsky, 67, said the funds stolen by Bell should have gone to children in need.

“I think all that money should have been going to someone else,” she said. 

“He’s just taken advantage of it and deserves everything he gets as far as I’m concerned.”

A prominent supporter of the Liberal Party in Mount Gambier told the ABC he felt Bell had been a very good member of parliament, despite the guilty verdict.

Barney McCusker was the first person thanked in Bell’s maiden speech to parliament in 2014.

He said Bell had been an exceptionally good local member and his family would be going through a tough time now.

“I think he’s worked energetically —very energetically —for the people of this area and achieved great things by advocating for them, so it is just a tragedy that it’s come to this because he has been an excellent state member for the people of Mount Gambier,” Dr McCusker said.

What are Bell’s intentions?

Bell did not comment while leaving court last night, and his lawyer Nick Healy was similarly terse.

“I’ve got nothing to say,” he repeated, and did not comment on whether there would be an appeal.

In total, the Mount Gambier MP has been found guilty of 20 counts of theft and five counts of dishonest dealings with documents.

An individual charged with one count of basic theft faces a maximum penalty of 10 years’ imprisonment, while an aggravated offence of dishonest dealings with documents carries a maximum sentence of 15 years in jail.

The aggravated element present in some of the charges Bell was found guilty of derives from his abuse of power and of his position of trust.