Blame Canada! Zuckerberg subpoenaed to face Cambridge Anal. probe from Canucks The Canadian parliament says it plans to subpoena Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and COO Sheryl Sandberg as part of a probe into Cambridge Analytica's shenanigans. The Great White North's Parliament Ethics Committee voted on Tuesday to issue subpoenas for both execs as it looks into how Facebook allowed Cambridge Analytica to …
IANAL, but I believe a subpoena needs to be served on the subject of the subpoena first, then if the subject has been served and continues to ignore it they can be done for contempt.
However, if it is not served on the subject, then the subject cannot be done for contempt. The courts jurisdiction, it's power to serve the subpoena, is limited to its legal jurisdiction, e.g. Canada. Therefore if the subject of the subpoena isn't in the jurisdiction of the court, the subject can't be served it under the legal processes of that jurisdiction. Therefore if the subpoena expires before it is legally served on the subject, then no contempt (in the legal sense anyway) has occurred.
This isn't to say they couldn't, I guess, set the time limit for something like 10 years, so they'd have to avoid Canadian territory for 10 years. However, I'd think a subpoena would usually be issued for the duration of the inquiry being undertaken. Therefore if an inquiry of some sort (court case, royal commission, parliamentary inquiry of some kind) is taking place, they usually have some sort of terms of reference that include a period of time the investigation is supposed to last. There is a date by which they have to produce their report/judgement/findings. Therefore I'd suspect that any subpoena issued would expire by that end-date of the inquiry, as their powers to issue any subpoena's would then no longer be valid.
The existing legal frameworks of most countries, including Canada, was not designed to deal with transnational billionaires. They're not even very effective with run-of-the-mill millionaires. They are really only good for crushing peons like the rest of us: which they do remarkably well every day. Forget about "socialism for the rich", what has actually been achieved is anarchy for the oligarchs.
I did ask nicely before but you still want to show the 'borg's face when perhaps Beaker off the Muppets would be better. I don't know if this link will work but maybe this is a reasonable likeness to replace the 'borg's boat - https://browse.startpage.com/do/show_picture.pl?l=english&rais=1&oiu=https%3A%2F%2Fstatic.independent.co.uk%2Fs3fs-public%2Fthumbnails%2Fimage%2F2018%2F05%2F04%2F15%2Fthe-muppets-2.jpg&sp=bc8c9b3de4615b0ede6371dbed8ee081&t=default
"In the first meeting of the international committee, held last Fall in London, England,"
For a UK based website surely that should read "In the first meeting of the international committee, held last autumn in London"?
(And if you really insist on disambiguating London, the country should be 'Britain', or the 'UK').
This post has been deleted by its author
Until the Lisbon Treaty removes nation-state status in 2020, this country is still called England.
You don't hear of people from Scotland being told to call themselves British. You don't hear of people from Wales being called told to call themselves British.
So why are people from England told we should call ourselves British, or risk being brought up on racial discrimination charges?
Of course, after the Lisbon Treaty we will all be residents of the Federated States of Europe, or whatever they decide to call it, so there will be no more nationalities, only Administrative Regions. (Funny how the Remoaners always fail to mention that little part of the plan when telling us how much better off we are letting Brussels run everything...)
London is the capital city of both England and Britain, and as referring to it as 'London, Britain' includes both England and Britain, that's the phrasing I use.
It's the same as saying that SATA is a connection used for hard drives, or saying that it's used for storage devices (also including CDROM, SSD's etc.).
One is a subset of the other, so I'll go for the phrasing that includes all possible uses.
"So why are people from England told we should call ourselves British, or risk being brought up on racial discrimination charges?"
That's complete bollocks. And that's not how discrimination works (you can't discriminate against yourself). And calling yourself 'English' is not an offence under the Equality Act 2010, you can call yourself 'Marmalade Fuckface' if you like, it's how you treat other people that's potentially infringing.
(Of course, if you did feel like discriminating against someone on the basis of their nationality you could just pop over to Europe. UK laws are more stringent on that front).
"Until the Lisbon Treaty removes nation-state status in 2020"
The Lisbon Treaty was ratified in 2009 and doesn't have anything to say about the names of countries.
(It did include provisions for countries to leave the EU though, so we do have the Lisbon Treaty to thank for brexit)
"Funny how the Remoaners always fail to mention that little part of the plan"
Because it's made-up lies, the same way no-one complains about how the EU is going to turn us all into small pink ducks, because it's not sodding true.
"no-one complains about how the EU is going to turn us all into small pink ducks, because it's not sodding true."
I expect it to be part of the Brexit party's platform at the forthcoming grandson's day off school. (He's doing well for his last May in primary school - two Bank Holidays and two closures for use as a polling station.)
"We have given our chair the mandate to issue a summons to Mark Zuckerberg and Sheryl Sandberg if they choose not to come before the International Grand Committee," MP Charlie Angus told CBC.
No doubt they are far too busy to attend but will send someone else. It'll probably be the part time cleaner.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
