3 ms·
The Constitutional Society wrote an 86-page paper in 2012 attempting to show that any such powers are extinct, and that primary legislation is necessary to rest
by topynate 8y ago
The Constitutional Society wrote an 86-page paper in 2012 attempting to show that any such powers are extinct, and that primary legislation is necessary to restore them: https://www.consoc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Select-Committees-and-Coercive-Powers-Clarity-or-Confusion.pdf https://www.consoc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Select-...
But late last year, a select committee exercised these powers anyway: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/nov/24/mps-seize-cache-facebook-internal-papers https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/nov/24/mps-seize...
- pmyteh 8y agoThe question is one of enforcement. Parliament can certainly order the production of documents, and send the Serjeant-at-Arms to threaten consequences if the documents aren't provided. That was enough in November to get the documents coughed up (one suspects that the target in that case had no particular incentive to test the limits of constitutional authority, given it wasn't his secrets he was being coerced over - a good excuse for handing them over would seem to be enough). What's not abundantly clear is if Parliament can actually still carry through its threat of imprisonment for contempt, if the recipient of the order decides to face down the Serjeant. It's possible that the courts would swiftly issue a writ of Habeas Corpus on the basis that contempt of Parliament is defunct. It's also possible that the European Court of Human Rights would consider legislative proceedings for contempt to be a breach of the Convention, but as actions of Parliament are outside the reach of the Human Rights Act (which makes the Convention directly applicable in the UK) they have no way of enforcing the decision even if they made it - and it would take months at least to get to the front of the queue.