Should a politician, who has been formerly convicted of a crime, be allowed to run for office?

Yes as long as it was not a felong, violent, or sexual crime, and they did not commit while in office

Yes, so long as that crime wasn't related to abuse of authority. Banning criminals from office or the vote just puts more polititpower in the hands of those with cash for fancy lawyers

As long as it is not a felony, violent, financial or sexual crime, and have served their sentence. Alongside this, disallow politicians undergoing investigation for a crime.

Yes, provided they have committed no crimes in the last 10 years and are not currently serving a sentence.

yes if you know they have changed just see if they would do anything bad in a week with no pay and if they do it again fire them.

Yes, as long as the crime was not committed while in office and they have completed the entirety of their sentence (including any parole period).

Yes, as long as it was not an imprisonable offence committed in office and they serve their punishment.

Yes, provided it is spent according to the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act, and declared to voters.

Yes to an extent. If they have proven that they have changed and indeed believe in helping the country then yes. Otherwise no.

Depends what the crime was and how long ago.

Yes but only for very minor crimes and only if they can explain the situation with full accountability and honesty.

Depends on the offence of course.

Yes, as long as the crime wasn’t related to political corruption

Don’t Know

Yes, as long as their conviction is spent

Yes but not serious crimes like pedophile murder and rape

Yes, but I would rather abolish the government all together

It depends on the crime and the justice peroid etc.

Yes if they are truly rehabilitated

Yes, providing that crime was not relevant to their current office and sentence was served.

If they became smart and it wasn’t such a big crime then yes

Depends on the crime, but no

Any British National excepting British Protected People, certain Commonwealth Citizens, and subjects/citizens of the other Realms of the Crown, hold the right to hold public office. That right is forfeited permanently if the individual has committed to High Treason, Sedition, or any other serious crime. Petty Treason will not result in the revocation of the after-fore-mentioned right. Any politician who has committed any criminal act may have their right to hold public office temporarily revoked for a minimum of 10 years. That right may be restored on the conditions outlined by the courts, or may be default can be regranted after 10 years of no convictions of crime.

Yes, as long as the conviction has been "spent" in line with requirements for other public sector jobs

as long as it was not a felony, violent, financial or sexual, or committed whilst in office

His past doesn't define him. If he can prove change.

Yes, provided that: they have served their sentence, and they are fit for purpose.

It is nuanced

As long as the crime was minor and they have changed

If the crime they committed was worth more than 4 years in prison they should be banned for running for a political position

depends on what crime was committed and how recently it happened

they should if they didnt serve time in hms prisons

Yes, but not violent, financial, or sexual crime, and their offence should be made public information so people can make their own informed judgements.

If there is evidence of a change then yes, they may try to become a political advocate. Unless their crime is listed with a gross excess in violence or other forms of inhuman acts.

It depends on the severity of their crime

Yes, and any who are convincted of ANY offense (except minor traffic offenses) during there term in office should be sacked immediately! (Incl. Convictions incurring no penalties or only small fees of £50)

It depends on the severity of the crime they commit and whether they have finished serving there sentence or not.

If they have served their sentence and it was not an electoral offence, then they should be allowed to stand and let the public decide

Yes, as long as the crime was not committed while in office and they are regularly audited in their position

Yes, so long as the offence and if they are still serving a sentence, is publicly disclosed in marketing materials

Yes, as long as it was a nonviolent crime and they have completed their sentence

Yes if they have undergone some sort of rehab and it’s public knowledge

Yes as long as it is spent

Depends entirely on the offence, this isn't a yes or no answer

Yes, only if it was a minor crime that happened significantly long time prior to being allowed to run for office, and there is evidence of change and retribution.

No, but dependent on the nature and severity of the crime, and relevance to position (e.g. financial).

combination of 3rd 4th and 5th

In a case bt case basis

It depends on the crime. You should not be allowed to run for office if you have commited sexual or hate crimes.