SNP MP John Nicolson has been cleared by Parliament’s high Independent Expert Panel of bullying and harassing Nadine Dorries on Twitter.

Ms Dorries reported Mr Nicolson in October 2022, alleging the senior MP had bullied and harassed her throughout a 24-hour Twitter spree, wherein he tweeted, preferred or retweeted 168 posts about her, a few of which referred to the then-culture secretary as “grotesque”, a “vacuous goon”, and as having been “rag-dolled” by him throughout Parliamentary exchanges.

While the preliminary complaints investigator initially concluded Mr Nicholson had not breached the MP code of conduct, the Commissioner disagreed and stated the MP’s behaviour “in both instances amounts to both bullying and harassment” in breach of the MP code of conduct.

Today an appeals panel has reversed that call and concluded Mr Nicholson broke no guidelines.

The appeals panel stated the commissioner had failed on three counts in concluding Mr Nicholson was responsible.

READ MORE: Dorries shamed as shocking tweet branded ‘dangerous’ by Minister

Firstly he didn’t totally take note of that Parliamentary guidelines should not stop vigorous opposition to the Government.

The panel says they don’t need to seem like they’re setting a precedent that MPs' on-line assaults can proceed with out restrict, however the coverage should defend “legitimate political activity”.

Secondly they argue that Ms Dorries’ personal tweets undermine her argument that Mr Nicholson’s had been bullying.

The report cites tweets from Ms Dorries’ account to show she herself shouldn't be above strongly-worded assaults on social media.

“On one occasion she referred in a tweet to a journalist with whom she has had a sustained difficult relationship as 'an apologist for Islamic atrocities'.”

In one other row with a unique journalist, she threatened she would “nail [the journalist’s] balls to the floor using [the journalist’s] own front teeth”.

Thirdly the commissioner failed to think about the sequencing of occasions main as much as the grievance.

The panel thought of the chronology of occasions across the complaints, which associated to tweets from November 2021, instantly following a testy battle between the pair on the Commons Culture Select Committee.

Ms Dorries didn’t make a grievance till October 2022, nonetheless.

The then-culture secretary additionally sparked a row with the committee in May 2022 whereas defending her plans to privatise Channel 4.

During the committee listening to, she claimed Channel 4 documentary individuals had been actually actors, falsely introduced as members of the general public - one thing Channel 4 vigorously denied.

In July 2022 Mr Nicholson raised the row within the Commons chamber, questioning whether or not she sought to intentionally mislead the Committee.

Mr Nicholson additionally wrote to the House of Lords Appointment Committee in August 2022 to flag the allegation amid stories Nadine Dorries was searching for a peerage.

It was after this row, due to this fact, that Ms Dorries’ grievance concerning the ‘abusive’ tweets was lodged.

Thirdly the commissioner failed to think about the sequencing of occasions main as much as the grievance. 

The panel thought of the chronology of occasions across the complaints, which associated to tweets from November 2021, instantly following a testy battle between the pair on the Commons Culture Select Committee. 

Ms Dorries didn’t make a grievance till October 2022, nonetheless. 

The then-culture secretary additionally sparked a row with the committee in May 2022 whereas defending her plans to privatise Channel 4. 

During the committee listening to she claimed Channel 4 documentary individuals had been actually actors, falsely introduced as members of the general public - one thing Channel 4 vigorously denied.

In July 2022 Mr Nicholson raised the row within the Commons chamber, questioning whether or not she sought to intentionally mislead the Committee. 

Mr Nicholson additionally wrote to the House of Lords Appointment Committee in August 2022 amid stories Nadine Dorries was searching for a peerage. 

It was after this row, due to this fact, that Ms Dorries’ grievance concerning the ‘abusive’ tweets was lodged. 

While the committee overturned the Commissioner’s findings to evaluate Mr Nicholson harmless, they did agree that liking and retweeting tweets “are not neutral acts” and will “potentially lead to a breach of the Policy” in a future case.

They stated of their view “it was unwise of this respondent to like or retweet some of the tweets in question, albeit this was a much less direct act than to tweet in such terms himself”.

“But we can conceive of tweets which would be so intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or insulting that to ‘like’ or retweet them would breach the policy”.