for taking a seat in the House of Assembly after becoming a US citizen, according to a top UK expert in constitutional law.

And English barrister Michael Beloff QC said the chances of Dr. Brown being found guilty were -- on the face of it -- "reasonable.'' He added that if convicted, Dr. Brown would be put in a position where his seat could be lost.

Mr. Beloff said: "If Dr. Brown is convicted, a vacancy petition may be presented to the Supreme Court stating the conviction as the disqualifying circumstance, in which case the chances of a success upon the vacancy petition are strong.'' Mr. Beloff, however, stressed the "key question'' was one of fact -- whether Dr. Brown knew if he was disqualified or not.

The opinion from Mr. Beloff was asked for by former United Bermuda Party Premier Sir John Sharpe -- who lost his Warwick West seat to Dr. Brown by a handful of votes in the October 1993 General Election.

Last night Dr. Brown said: "I never thought for one moment that it was illegal for me, having been born in this Country, to sit in Parliament when people can come to this Country having been born elsewhere and do that.

"The bottom line is that it's discriminatory if a person who is not born in a country can retain dual citizenship and still serve in that country.'' Dr. Brown said -- if it came down to it -- he would have to think about whether to continue as an MP or retain his US passport instead.

But he added that he did not expect matters to reach that point and that he had several options to explore first.

He added Sir John's move was "not unexpected'' and said: "I think there was an element of sour grapes involved -- I really wish Sir John would spend more time with his grandchildren and stay out of politics.'' Dr. Brown said he understood UBP politicians were polling poorly in Warwick West and it was possible they now sought to defeat him in the courts instead of at the polls.

The shock legal opinion comes on the eve of a motion by Shadow Labour and Home Affairs Minister to remove a clause in the Bermuda Constitution barring anyone holding "allegiance, obedience or adherence'' to a foreign power or state.

The motion is to be debated during a special session of the House of Assembly today.

Bermudian-born Dr. Brown, who lived and worked in the US for many years, took US citizenship in 1990.

He returned to Bermuda in 1992 and was elected an MP for the Progressive Labour Party a year later.

When doubts over his eligibility arose in 1995, Dr. Brown said he was aware of the section barring anyone who pledged allegiance to a foreign power -- but a lawyer had advised him his US citizenship was not a problem.

Mr. Beloff said the proper route for challenging Dr. Brown's election -- in a contest in which he apparently was not eligible to stand -- was by representation petition to the Supreme Court.

House set to debate oaths of allegiance But he added that any such claim was time-barred because it would have to have been made within 28 days of Dr. Brown's election victory.

Mr. Beloff said: "There are no present grounds for such a vacancy petition.'' But his opinion added: "In my view, the plain meaning of the United States oath of allegiance is that the new citizen has declared, and thereby acknowledged, his allegiance to the United States.

"The services which the oath-sayer must promise to render, if called upon, are precisely those which a Government may demand of those people who owe it allegiance.

"Thus, on the face of it, Dr. Brown was not eligible to stand for election in 1993.'' But he said: "Dr. Brown certainly knew that he had taken the US oath of allegiance upon becoming an American citizen. But knowledge of the circumstances which make the offence unlawful is not the requisite knowledge.'' Mr. Beloff said the Bermuda Constitution said any MP, anyone registered as a Warwick West elector or the Attorney General could take the vacancy case to the Supreme Court.

Yesterday, Sir John denied he was motivated by sour grapes after losing his seat to the PLP newcomer.

And he said he had never contemplated leading an action against Dr. Brown himself.

Sir John said: "By the time the offence came to light, too much water had passed under the bridge. And in any case, I take the view that if any action was to be taken, it should be taken by the Attorney General as a means of keeping it out of the party political environment.'' He added: "The Constitution is the most important legal document which exists -- it's there for the protection of Bermudians' rights and that's why it's important it should be upheld.'' While it is not expected that any legal action will be taken, but Dr. Brown may face problems defending his seat in the next General Election.

Mr. Scott's motion says that "foreign-born status Bermudians who hold and enjoy dual citizenship'' can sit in the House and Senate -- but born Bermudians who hold status and citizenship in foreign countries cannot.

Government, however, has pointed out that status Bermudians and those who chose to assume another nationality were in different boats.

Home Affairs Minister Quinton Edness insisted there was a world of difference between someone who happened to be born abroad -- but later took an oath of loyalty to the Queen -- and someone who "by virtue of his own act'' took out another nationality.

Dr. Ewart Brown COURT CTS