Does Conrad Black have to relinquish his title?

[Lincoln Republican]

Conrad Black, Baron of Crossharbour, has been convicted to 78 months in prison for diverting company funds for personal benefit.

Now that he has been convicted of a criminal offence, does Lord Black have to relinquish his peerage?

Anyone know?

Perhaps some of the forum members from the U.K.?

[Јas]

Conrad Black, Baron of Crossharbour, has been convicted to 78 months in prison for diverting company funds for personal benefit.

Now that he has been convicted of a criminal offence, does Lord Black have to relinquish his peerage?

Anyone know?

Perhaps some of the forum members from the U.K.?

I'm fairly sure that criminal conviction doesn't negate a peerage.

(e.g. I *think* Jeffrey Archer is still Lord somesuch and still a member of the House of Lords.)

[Hatman 🍁]

He should have his Order of Canada taken away.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Jas is right. Pete would know more about the details though.

[Silent Hunter]

Jas is right. Pete would know more about the details though.

It has to explicitly taken off someone.

Anthony Blunt lost his knighthood when it came out he'd been one of the Cambridge Five (although it had already been known in government, I think), but he hadn't been convicted of anything, IIRC.

[Peter]

Given that Lord Black's conviction is by a foreign court, I doubt whether it would be recognised by the British Courts.

Regardless, Lord Black will still possess a right to sit in the House of Lords. There was a proposal after Jeffrey Archer returned to the Lords that convicted peers (where sentence was a year or greater) should be disqualified (and possibly retroactively), this eventually either died a death or got talked out by sympathetic Tory peers.

Lord Black of Crossharbour will be yet another peer who in recent years has been convicted of an offence; He follows Lord Archer and Lord Watson (a Labour Scottish peer, also an MSP, who was convicted of fireraising). I suspect that a disqualification act will eventually be passed, if only to plug this hole of credibility.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Ah yes, Lord Watson. Hid the matches in his sporran or something equally absurd IIRC.

[Robespierre's Jaw]

He should have his Order of Canada taken away.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Just like Steve Vizard and Richard Pratt's, though they "chose" to give their Order of Australia's away, I think their lawyers would have told them to do so after their disastrous business choices. When will they learn that insider trading does not work? Knowing them never.

[Lincoln Republican]

Thank you all for your responses.  Very informative.  Much appreciated.

[J. J.]

No, Lord Archer of Weston-Super-Mare is still Lord Archer of Weston-Super-Mare.

I do recall several knights being degraded, but no peerage (or baronetcy) ever being removed in recent history.