Should Parliament be able to summons the Murdochs?

[RandBlade]

Parliament has issued a Summons to Rebekah Brooks (a British citizen) and Rupert and James Murdoch (American citizens). Rebekah will have to attend or risk imprisonment (but that's not happened I believe in modern times). It doesn't seem certain though how much Parliament can compel the Murdoch's to appear if they were to refuse given that they are American citizens.

The American Senate has summoned British citizens in the past. Not sure whether or not they would face consequences if they refused to attend.

I think that if they were to return to America and stay there then they should be able to refuse to attend, but while in the UK (or perhaps the EU as a whole) then they should face consequences if they refuse to attend. Especially for James who works in the UK. Vice-versa for Congress, if they were to summon a European then I think they should face consequences if they refuse but choose to be on American soil.

[agamemnus]

No, I don't think they should be compelled to do so.

[earthJoker]

If I understand him correctly he Rupert Mordochs of the world (plural not genitive).

About the OP question: No I don't think so, I think that would be a big mess if the UK parliament summons any foreign citizen for whatever reason. I don't know which countries even have this concept, we don't have it AFAIK.

[Wraith]

If Parliament is summoning them, I kinda think they should be compelled to go, under the assumption that they'd be treated at least as fairly as a British citizen under the same circumstances.

What consequences would a British citizen face if they refused a summons by Parliament?

[Veldan Rath]

If Parliament is summoning them, I kinda think they should be compelled to go, under the assumption that they'd be treated at least as fairly as a British citizen under the same circumstances.

What consequences would a British citizen face if they refused a summons by Parliament?

Under what authority would Parliment be able to enforce a summons to me as an American Citizen if I'm not in England?

They can summon all they want, but I want to know how they can make me go. What are they gonna do, send the SAS after me? (They had better send the good looking ones).

[Wraith]

Under what authority would Parliment be able to enforce a summons to me as an American Citizen if I'm not in England?

I'm saying I think that maybe US should be willing to enforce it. I still want more information though before I really commit to that stance.

[GGT]

Under what authority would Parliment be able to enforce a summons to me as an American Citizen if I'm not in England?

They can summon all they want, but I want to know how they can make me go. What are they gonna do, send the SAS after me? (They had better send the good looking ones).

Because you're doing business in the UK, and you're a multi-national corporation doing business around the world? Your nationality doesn't matter as much as the business you conduct in the UK, and should have been following their laws.

[LittleFuzzy]

I'm saying I think that maybe US should be willing to enforce it. I still want more information though before I really commit to that stance.

Uh. . . there is no full faith and credit clause governing international relations. Any such agreements would have to be worked out via treaty and for the US at least, would still have to adhere to other relevant Constitutional requirements like due process. And then we could simply say "nope, not gonna do it," the way France does when we request extradition. As it stands right now, we have no authority to enforce a foreign summons, whether on one of our citizens or for a citizen of the state trying to compel attendance who happens to be on our soil.

[Wraith]

I know it isn't the way of things now. I'm just not sure it's the right move.

[Lebanese Dragon]

I'd imagine the UK would aid in enforcing a summon, depending on the context.

[GGT]

What's with the gobbeldygook legalese?

Murdoch is a US citizen and owner of a multi-national corporation. That means he can be summoned by any nation he does business with, to address legalities and answer questions during a criminal investigation. He can send a lawyer to represent him. If he sends no one---then courts can proceed with him in absentia.

The US does have laws against bribing foreign officials, so he could be charged with that, here in his adopted nation. Regardless of what charges he or his son/daughter may face in the UK.

[Hazir]

No, but it should mean that his companies are not fit to own interests in British broadcasting.

[LittleFuzzy]

What's with the gobbeldygook legalese?

Murdoch is a US citizen and owner of a multi-national corporation. That means he can be summoned by any nation he does business with, to address legalities and answer questions during a criminal investigation. He can send a lawyer to represent him. If he sends no one---then courts can proceed with him in absentia.

The US does have laws against bribing foreign officials, so he could be charged with that, here in his adopted nation. Regardless of what charges he or his son/daughter may face in the UK.

Murdoch can be summoned by anyone. You could summon him. You can be summoned by anyone in turn. I can summon you. Doesn't mean anything, and I can't imagine why I'd want to spend even MORE time with you, but I could do it. And Murdoch is not being asked to appear before a court. He's being asked to appear before Parliament. Parliament is NOT a British court. If this is at all like structurally similar actions by the US Congress *I suspect that it is but am not entirely sure* than while it is investigatory, it is NOT a criminal investigation

[LittleFuzzy]

I know it isn't the way of things now. I'm just not sure it's the right move.

What, enforcing the workings of foreign domestic politics with our police power? In as much as countries get involved in that sort of thing, it's usually to PROTECT the foreign nationals from such workings.

[Veldan Rath]

What's with the gobbeldygook legalese?

It's called the Rule of Law...


England's Parliament has no authority to make me or the old fuck to come to their door.

A British Court on the other hand has a bit more leverage. (See Fuzzy's post on extradition) But until I set foot in Limeyland, no real ability to enforce either.

[Ominous Gamer]

How is a summons in the UK different from when the Senate requests someone to testify at a hearing? Because people turn down the Senate over here all the time, Sony just did it the other month when they were investigating the PSN breach.

[earthJoker]

I would find it rather absurd to give the British Parliament a power over people living in Switzerland that the Swiss parliament doesn't have.

[GGT]

Murdoch can be summoned by anyone. You could summon him. You can be summoned by anyone in turn. I can summon you. Doesn't mean anything, and I can't imagine why I'd want to spend even MORE time with you, but I could do it.

Well aren't you just the cute fuzzy bear who turns out to be course and hateful. Is this all the time or just during full moons?

And Murdoch is not being asked to appear before a court. He's being asked to appear before Parliament. Parliament is NOT a British court. If this is at all like structurally similar actions by the US Congress *I suspect that it is but am not entirely sure* than while it is investigatory, it is NOT a criminal investigation

Murdoch is a media mogul, with British ties. He knows damn well what all this means. *I suspect* that if he was innocent, he wouldn't resist the temptation to appear before Parliament and talk his way through. *I suspect* that even if he's not innocent, he may not be able to resist the media attention and might still try to talk his way through.

If the US files charges against him, it's a whole different ball game.

[LittleFuzzy]

Murdoch is a media mogul, with British ties. He knows damn well what all this means.

I'm sure he does. I'm equally certain you don't.

[wiggin]

How is a summons in the UK different from when the Senate requests someone to testify at a hearing? Because people turn down the Senate over here all the time, Sony just did it the other month when they were investigating the PSN breach.

Congress can subpoena people, in which case they have to show up or be held in contempt of Congress (which IIRC can include jail time and a fee). There are lots of 'requests' that get ignored, but if Congress really wants the testimony, they can make it a subpoena. I imagine it has similar penalties to ignoring a mandatory summons from the UK Parliament.

[RandBlade]

How is a summons in the UK different from when the Senate requests someone to testify at a hearing? Because people turn down the Senate over here all the time, Sony just did it the other month when they were investigating the PSN breach.

As far as I know it is very similar to processes with the US Senate, hence why I mentioned the US Senate as an equivalent in the Opening Post.

Veldan, both Murdochs happen to be in "Limeyland" right now, as well as owning substantial media interests here and James Murdoch being based in the UK as far as I am aware. James was born in Wimbledon (England) and I believe but am not certain that he works in England. While on "Limey" soil should Parliament be able to enforce its will even though he's a foreign national?

Parliament will normally request not summons someone. Like wiggin says, a summons is similar to a subpoena.

[GGT]

I'm sure he does. I'm equally certain you don't.

You're right, I probably don't have any idea what all this means. I'll just have to rely on news reports.

[Dreadnaught]

Veldan, both Murdochs happen to be in "Limeyland" right now, as well as owning substantial media interests here and James Murdoch being based in the UK as far as I am aware. James was born in Wimbledon (England) and I believe but am not certain that he works in England. While on "Limey" soil should Parliament be able to enforce its will even though he's a foreign national?

I'll stake the claim that they should. Just like a local cop can demand a tourist speak to them, Parliament can demand that someone speaks to them. It's not a trial after all.

[Hazir]

Besides which Parliament is sovereign in the UK.

[Wraith]

Parliament will normally request not summons someone. Like wiggin says, a summons is similar to a subpoena.

What do they do for a Limey in Limeyland who refuses such a summons?

[Dreadnaught]

Besides which Parliament is sovereign in the UK.

Nice.

[agamemnus]

Actually...

When I think of Parliament summoning Rupert Murdoch, I immediately think of the the trial of Alice by the Queen of Hearts in "Alice in Wonderland"...

[RandBlade]

Actually...

When I think of Parliament summoning Rupert Murdoch, I immediately think of the the trial of Alice by the Queen of Hearts in "Alice in Wonderland"...

Why? Do you think of that when the US Senate subpoenas someone?

Wraith: Someone who refuses to attend Parliament after being summoned can be held in "contempt of Parliament" and be imprisoned.

[Hazir]

Would hacking the phone of the Queen constitute high treason?

[Timbuk2]

Note that being summoned to parliament is highly, highly unusual.

If I recall, only three times previously in the entire history of parliament has there been a summoning, the last of which was Kevin and Ian Maxwell 20 years ago.

Which goes to show how seriously the UK gov is taking this, and rightfully so.

Particularly given the fact that no government in the last five, including the current one, has been voted in without Rupert Murdoch's backing.