James Murdoch, chairman of News International quits as hacking claims keep coming

James Murdoch, chairman of News International quits as hacking claims keep coming

Standing down... James Murdoch is driven away from the offices of News International in London. Photo: AP

The phone-hacking scandal has claimed its largest scalp with the resignation of the Murdoch empire's heir-apparent, James Murdoch, as executive chairman of News International.

The news comes as the Leveson inquiry into phone hacking was told that the phone of Rebekah Brooks, former chief executive of News International, was hacked twice a week by colleagues at the now defunct News of the World while she was editing its sister newspaper, The Sun.

In a move that raises questions about the succession to US-based billionaire Rupert Murdoch, James is leaving the print-based British arm but will keep responsibility for international television interests as deputy chief operating officer for News Corp.

Some view James's exit as opening the way for either of his siblings Elisabeth or Lachlan to emerge as the successor to their 80-year-old father.

News Corp's Australian-listed shares, meanwhile, rose on the news of James Murdoch's shift. A-class shares gained as much as 7 cents, or 0.4 per cent, to $18.53, while its B-class shares were up as much as 9 cents, or 0.5 per cent, to $18.95.

Tough questions

James Murdoch has faced tough questions from British parliamentarians about how much he knew about the degree of phone-hacking at the News of the World. The day before his resignation was announced, he was lambasted by MP Chris Bryant, who accused him of being involved in a corporate cover-up of hacking at News International.

The hacking took place before Mr Murdoch was in the chair but he was in charge in 2009 and 2010 when the company repeatedly denied that hacking went beyond a single "rogue reporter". His five-year term also saw the closure of the News of the World after revelations it had hacked the voicemail of a murdered schoolgirl, as well as the decision to put The Times website behind a pay-wall.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au