Dominic Cummings Vs Parliament and the issue of Contempt of Parliament

Dominic Cummings Vs Parliament and the issue of Contempt of Parliament

https://dominiccummings.com/2019/03/27/on-the-referendum-24n-actions-have-consequences/

Dominic Cummings - Vote Leave

What are the rights of Parliament and what are the rights of private citizens with regards to Parliament?

The issue came to the fore today when during a Privileges Motion Debate the matter was discussed that a private citizen when invited to attend a hearing of a Select Committee could find himself declared to be in contempt if he or she either refuses to answer questions or simply refuses to attend.


At the moment, Parliament can issue an admonition - criticising or condemning the refusal to answer questions or to attend such hearings. But there is a vested interest to go a lot farther than that and there is a suggestion that punitive measures could be adopted that could even involve the Judiciary.
The vested interest is that in this particular case we are talking about Brexit and that those who are directly opposed to Brexit would undoubtedly seek to demonise, misrepresent or damage the interests or persona of the individual they declare to be in contempt of Parliament.

There is such animosity that this particular situation could be used to transform the Legislative into Judge, Jury and Executioner of a private individual, animosity that could lead to the introduction of legal measures that could be detrimental for individual basic rights.

Whether people respect Parliament or don't respect Parliament, whether people like Parliament or dislike Parliament is not something that should be made into Law when it comes to political decisions taken by Parliament.

Quite a few people very much dislike the present Parliament and say so openly. Quite a few people don't trust Parliament and say so openly. Are they in contempt of Parliament? If somebody doesn't want to allow himself or herself to be used by Parliament in a way that is detrimental for the rights of the individual, is the individual entitled to protect his or her rights? Of will the individual become a hostage of Parliament and forced to act against himself or herself?

As it was well noted, in the United States of America citizens are entitled to refuse to answer because answers that they might provide would incriminate them. Are political interest being put before the right of the individual? Is Parliament trying to become a sort of Inquisition?

We haven't seen the legislation proposed because it was suggested that Members of Parliament involved in the promotion of punitive measures should think very carefully about what punitive measures would be proposed.

At the moment, there is no legal obligation to attend any committee hearings. Attendance is voluntary and so is the process of answering questions. Having said that, if somebody were to give evidence or answer questions under Oath there are legal implications including charges for Perjury if somebody were to state or declare or answer questions untruthfully.

The case involving Parliament and Dominic Cummings is not merely about respecting or not respecting Parliament. This is a political issue and especially when Parliament doesn't seem to come together to decide on very important matters. When we are in principle less than two weeks away from exiting the European Union, to bring such a case for consideration on the floor of the House of Commons is, as stated before, far from being merely a legal matter. This is a clear and self-evident process pushed forward with a visible political intention.