Headline

UK Parliament To Punish Boris Johnson For ‘Partygate’ Scandal

Published

2 years ago

June 19, 2023

Editor

Boris Johnson

British MPs vote Monday on a damning report that found ex-prime minister Boris Johnson deliberately lied to parliament about lockdown-breaking parties, in what the government hopes will be the final chapter in the damaging “Partygate” scandal.

The parliamentary vote is being held on Johnson’s 59th birthday as the wounded former leader ponders his next move, with allies predicting a future return to the electoral fray.

It also comes at a time of mounting political problems for Rishi Sunak’s Conservative government as stubbornly high inflation and constantly rising interest rates inflict economic pain on voters.

The populist architect of Brexit, Johnson led the Conservative party to a landslide victory at the last general election in December 2019.

But he was forced to quit as prime minister last July due to Partygate and a string of other scandals.

Johnson has rejected the report by parliament’s Privileges Committee, claiming he has been the victim of a stitch-up by political opponents and a “kangaroo court”.

The committee in a scathing 106-page report on Thursday found him guilty of “repeated contempts (of parliament) and… seeking to undermine the parliamentary process”.

“The contempt was all the more serious because it was committed by the prime minister, the most senior member of the government,” the report said, adding there was “no precedent for a prime minister having been found to have deliberately misled the house”.

Even as the vote looked set to draw a line under the Partygate scandal, another video emerged Sunday of Tory party officials partying in December 2020 during lockdown.

Levelling Up Secretary Michael Gove apologised for the Covid rule breach at a time when the public was banned from socialising or meeting loved ones.

He told the BBC the footage was “terrible” and “indefensible”.

Johnson could have faced a 90-day suspension and the humiliation of having to run for re-election in his constituency had he not quit as a lawmaker on June 9 after receiving an advance copy of the report.

A few of his close allies are expected to vote against the report, but they are said to be unconcerned about the recommended sanction of removing his parliamentary pass.

Johnson has reportedly privately urged supporters not to vote against the report, arguing the sanctions have no practical effect.

Conservative MP and Johnson loyalist Jacob Rees-Mogg predicted that the ex-premier might eventually stage a comeback.

“Perhaps, after the next election, Boris Johnson will return to the fray with a new electoral mandate,” he wrote Saturday in the right-leaning Daily Telegraph.

“His undimmed ebullience and joie de vivre, with a renewed sympathy from the electorate, many of whom think the privilege committee over-egged its pudding, leave him as a powerful force in politics,” he added.

Liz Truss, who briefly succeeded Johnson as prime minister last September, said on Thursday she would “never, ever, ever write Boris off”.

“I am sure we will hear more from him,” she said, adding that she viewed the proposed blocking of his parliamentary pass as “very harsh”.

Under-fire Sunak is now facing four potential by-elections — three linked to the Johnson fall-out.

These will give voters an opportunity to voice discontent over the government’s failure to tame inflation and the cost of living crisis.

While MPs have been caught up in the Johnson affair, commentators have repeatedly warned of a “mortgage time bomb” due to interest rates hikes that show no sign of ending.

Former Conservative minister Justine Greening told the BBC on Sunday it would be easier to persuade the public that the government had moved on if MPs backed the report on Monday.

“I think they should be decisive about supporting the privileges committee’s work,” she said.

“Essentially, it’s important to recognise that MPs, and especially prime ministers, cannot mislead parliament and be allowed to get away with that,” she added.

AFP

Headline

Antitrust Trial: US Asks Court To Break Up Google’s Ad Business

Published

16 hours ago

September 22, 2025

Editor

Google faces a fresh federal court test on Monday as US government lawyers ask a judge to order the breakup of the search engine giant’s ad technology business.

The lawsuit is Google’s second such test this year, following a similar government demand to split up its empire that was shot down by a judge earlier this month.

Monday’s case focuses specifically on Google’s ad tech “stack” — the tools that website publishers use to sell ads and that advertisers use to buy them.

In a landmark decision earlier this year, Federal Judge Leonie Brinkema agreed with the US Department of Justice (DOJ) that Google maintained an illegal grip on this market.

Monday’s trial is set to determine what penalties and changes Google must implement to undo its monopoly.

According to filings, the US government will argue that Google should spin off its ad publisher and exchange operations. The DOJ will also ask that after the divestitures are complete, Google be banned from operating an ad exchange for 10 years.

Google will argue that the divestiture demands go far beyond the court’s findings, are technically unfeasible, and would be harmful to the market and smaller businesses.

“We’ve said from the start that DOJ’s case misunderstands how digital advertising works and ignores how the landscape has dramatically evolved, with increasing competition and new entrants,” said Lee-Anne Mulholland, Google’s Vice President of Regulatory Affairs.

In a similar case in Europe, the European Commission, the EU’s antitrust enforcer, earlier this month fined Google 2.95 billion euros ($3.47 billion) over its control of the ad tech market.

Brussels ordered behavioral changes, drawing criticism that it was going easy on Google as it had previously indicated that a divestiture may be necessary.

This remedy phase of the US trial follows a first trial that found Google operated an illegal monopoly. It is expected to last about a week, with the court set to meet again for closing arguments a few weeks later.

The trial begins in the same month that a separate judge rejected a government demand that Google divest its Chrome browser, in an opinion that was largely seen as a victory for the tech giant.

That was part of a different case, also brought by the US Department of Justice, in which the tech giant was found responsible for operating an illegal monopoly, this time in the online search space.

Instead of a major breakup of its business, Google was required to share data with rivals as part of its remedies.

The US government had pushed for Chrome’s divestment, arguing the browser serves as a crucial gateway to the internet that brings in a third of all Google web searches.

Shares in Google-parent Alphabet have skyrocketed by more than 20 percent since that decision.

Judge Brinkema has said in pre-trial hearings that she will closely examine the outcome of the search trial when assessing her path forward in her own case.

These cases are part of a broader bipartisan government campaign against the world’s largest technology companies. The US currently has five pending antitrust cases against such companies.

AFP

Headline

Google Faces Court Battle Over Breakup Of Ad Tech Business

Published

17 hours ago

September 22, 2025

Editor

Google faces a fresh federal court test on Monday as US government lawyers ask a judge to order the breakup of the search engine giant’s ad technology business.

The lawsuit is Google’s second such test this year after the California-based tech juggernaut saw a similar government demand to split up its empire shot down by a judge earlier this month.

Monday’s case focuses specifically on Google’s ad tech “stack” — the tools that website publishers use to sell ads and that advertisers use to buy them.

In a landmark decision earlier this year, Federal Judge Leonie Brinkema agreed with the US Department of Justice (DOJ) that Google maintained an illegal grip on this market.
Monday’s trial is set to determine what penalties and changes Google must implement to undo its monopoly.

Google will argue that the divestiture demands go far beyond the court’s findings, are technically unfeasible, and would be harmful to the market and smaller businesses.

In a similar case in Europe, the European Commission, the EU’s antitrust enforcer, earlier this month fined Google 2.95 billion euros ($3.47 billion) over its control of the ad tech market.
Brussels ordered behavioral changes, drawing criticism that it was going easy on Google as it had previously indicated that a divestiture may be necessary.

The trial begins in the same month that a separate judge rejected a government demand that Google divest its Chrome browser, in an opinion that was largely seen as a victory for the tech giant.

That was part of a different case, also brought by the US Department of Justice, in which the tech giant was found responsible for operating an illegal monopoly, this time in the online search space.
Instead of a major breakup of its business, Google was required to share data with rivals as part of its remedies.

The US government had pushed for Chrome’s divestment, arguing the browser serves as a crucial gateway to the internet that brings in a third of all Google web searches.
Shares in Google-parent Alphabet have skyrocketed by more than 20 percent since that decision.

Judge Brinkema has said in pre-trial hearings that she will closely examine the outcome of the search trial when assessing her path forward in her own case.

These cases are part of a broader bipartisan government campaign against the world’s largest technology companies. The US currently has five pending antitrust cases against such companies.

Headline

Peru Anti-government Protesters Clash With Police

Published

2 days ago

September 21, 2025

Editor

Hundreds of anti-government protesters clashed with police in the Peruvian capital Lima on Saturday, throwing stones and sticks as officers fired tear gas on the demonstrators, AFP journalists reported.

The protest, organized by a youth collective called “Generation Z”, is part of growing social unrest in Peru against organized crime, corruption in public office, and a recent pension reform.

“Today, there is less democracy than before. It’s getting worse… because of fear, because of extortion,” said 54-year-old protester Gladys, who declined to give her last name.

Around 500 people gathered in the city center, under heavy police presence.

“Congress has no credibility, it doesn’t even have the approval of the people… It is wreaking havoc in this country,” said protester Celene Amasifuen.

The clashes broke out as demonstrators tried to approach executive and congressional buildings in Lima.

The radio station Exitosa said that its reporter and a cameraman were hit by pellets, commonly fired by law enforcement.

Police said at least three officers were wounded.

Approval ratings for President Dina Boluarte, whose term ends next year, have plummeted amid rising extortion and organized crime cases.

Several opinion polls show the government and conservative-majority Congress are seen by many as corrupt institutions.

This week, the legislature passed a law requiring young adults to join a private pension fund, despite many facing a precarious working environment.