scholarly journals The Attorney General, Politics, and the Public Interest. Contributions to an Evolving Constitutional Convention

2022 ◽  
pp. 1-20
Author(s):  
Michael Murphy
Keyword(s):  
Quality Control ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Prime Minister ◽  
Attorney General ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Prosecutorial Discretion ◽  
Constitutional Convention ◽  
The Public ◽  
Normative Framework

Abstract The prosecutorial independence of the Attorney General (AG) is a firmly established constitutional convention in Canada, but it is also an evolving convention, subject to ongoing contestation and debate. This article is a contribution to that debate. It defends a normative constitutional framework wherein the AG’s authority to make final decisions in matters of criminal prosecution is balanced against a corresponding duty to consult with cabinet and the prime minister on the public interest implications of prosecutorial decisions when the circumstances warrant. Within this normative framework, respectful contestation and debate amongst ministers, the prime minister, and the AG in determining the public interest merits of prosecution is welcomed, even encouraged, and if conducted with the requisite integrity, objectivity, and transparency, it is regarded not as a threat but as a valuable check and balance on AG independence and an indispensable form of quality control on the exercise of prosecutorial discretion.

OPTIMALISASI ASAS OPORTUNITAS PADA KEWENANGAN JAKSA GUNA MEMINIMALISIR DAMPAK PRIMUM REMEDIUM DALAM PEMIDANAAN

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 213-236
Author(s):  
Yodi Nugraha
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Attorney General ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Comparative Approach ◽  
Public Prosecutor ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
The Public

In the Indonesian criminal justice system, every public prosecutor possesses the authority to cease criminal prosecution in the name of public interest. In contrast, in the Netherland, only the Attorney General (Procureur Generaal) at the Supreme Court has this authority.  This article discusses this authority to cease of terminate criminal prosecution in the name of public interest.  To do this a comparative approach is used in which the ruling of this authority to terminate criminal prosecution as found in the Draft of the Indonesian Criminal Code will be compared against the same regulation and policy used in the Netherlands.  A doctrinal and comparative law approach will be used. One recommendation resulting from this research is the need to re-evaluate the existing procedure and requirement of terminating criminal prosecution in the public interest in the Indonesian context and the introduction of Rechter-Commissaris into the criminal justice system.

Female Genital Cosmetic Surgery: Legitimate Refinement or Illegal Mutilation?

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-19
Author(s):  
Ruth Gaffney-Rhys
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Cosmetic Surgery ◽  
Female Genital Mutilation ◽  
Prima Facie ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Genital Mutilation ◽  
The Public ◽  
Healthy Female ◽  
Female Genital Cosmetic Surgery ◽  
Female Genital

Abstract The aim of this article is to assess whether Female Genital Cosmetic Surgery (FGCS), which refers to procedures which change the structure and appearance of healthy female genitalia for non-medical reasons, violates the Female Genital Mutilation Act 2003, in the light of CPS guidance issued in 2019 and literature regarding the motivations of women seeking FGCS and its effectiveness. The paper concludes that FGCS does, prima facie, constitute FGM and argues that the medical exception contained in the legislation should seldom be available – but based on CPS guidance, a criminal prosecution will rarely be in the public interest. The article ends by asserting that the distinction drawn in practice (if not in law) between the treatment of western and non-western women is problematic, not only because it is discriminatory, but because tolerating FGCS may serve to legitimise FGM and result in the circumvention of the FGM Act 2003.

Eisenhower’s executive privilege and the public interest

2019 ◽  
pp. 54-84
Author(s):  
Kevin M. Baron
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Attorney General ◽  
Executive Branch ◽  
Executive Power ◽  
Freedom Of Information ◽  
Government Information ◽  
Executive Orders ◽  
White House ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Creation

This chapter delves into the depths of one of the most important developments within modern American politics, the creation and institutionalization of executive privilege. In facing a fervent Congress in the grips of McCarthyism, Eisenhower issued a letter denying testimony to the Senate for the Army-McCarthy hearings. His letter included a memo from Attorney General Brownell that claimed the president had an inherent constitutional privilege to deny information to Congress or the public if it was in the public interest and for national security. This action institutionalized the Cold War Paradigm in the executive branch and created an extra-constitutional power for the president. Eisenhower issued several executive orders concerning classification and public dissemination of government information, along with the creation of the Office of Strategic Information (OSI) within the Commerce Department to oversee these policies. Eisenhower claimed historic precedent to justify his inherent constitutional power, regardless, it showed a learned response that changed executive power. Congress would respond in 1955 by creating the Special Subcommittee on Government Information chaired by Rep. John Moss, given jurisdiction for oversight on all executive branch information policies and practices. With the issue of freedom of information institutionalized in Congress, a 12-year legislative power struggle would unfold between Congress and the White House ending with the passage of the Freedom of Information Act in 1966.

scholarly journals Converging Criminal Justice Systems: Guilty Pleas and the Public Interest

1997 ◽  
Vol 31 (1-3) ◽  
pp. 169-182 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abraham S. Goldstein
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
Prosecutorial Discretion ◽  
The Public ◽  
Formal Systems ◽  
Criminal Justice Systems ◽  
Justice Systems

It is becoming increasingly apparent to criminal justice scholars that single theory models of criminal procedure — whether termed inquisitorial or adversarial — are being stretched beyond their capacity by the phenomena they are designed to control. Virtually everywhere, formal systems of charge and adjudication cannot possibly be enforced in accordance with the premises underlying them. There are simply too many offenses, too many offenders and too few resources to deal with them all. One result has been a steady movement towards a convergence of legal systems — towards borrowing from others those institutions and practices that offer some hope of relief.In this transnational effort to cope with system overload, two issues have emerged as more than ordinarily significant: The first is the desirability of abandoning the principle of obligatory prosecution, so common in Continental Europe, and turning instead to the exercise of prosecutorial discretion. The second is the question whether the ban on guilty pleas and plea bargains should be lifted, as in adversarial systems.

scholarly journals Tafsir Wewenang Seponering Jaksa Agung Pasca Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 29/PUU-XIV/2016

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ilham Dwi Rafiqi
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Attorney General ◽  
State Power ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
The Public ◽  
Legal Implications ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Definition Of

The affirmation of the attorney general's authority in the Elucidation of Article 35 letter C of the Indonesian Prosecutor's Law after the decision of the Constitutional Court Number 29/PUU-XIV/2016 still leaves problems and has the potential to cause new legal problems. This research will look at and analyze how the authority of the Attorney General after the decision is as well as how the concept of an ideal arrangement that ensures legal certainty. This research uses normative juridical research with a statutory approach and case studies which in this case are court decisions. The results showed that after Constitutional Court decision, there was a change in the meaning of the Elucidation of Article 35 letter c of the Republic of Indonesia Prosecutor's Law. Based on the results of these interpretations and decisions, the legal implications that followed were related to the conditions for setting aside cases in the public interest, namely in setting aside cases in the public interest, the Attorney General was required to 'require' first to pay attention to suggestions and opinions from state power agencies that have relationship with the problem. The concept of an ideal arrangement that can guarantee legal certainty as an indicator to measure and assess the implementation of the Attorney General's obligations can be done by clarifying the definition of "state power agencies" for which advice and opinions are requested and making criteria for the term "public interest".

COVID-19, Death Records and the Public Interest: Now is the Time to Push for Transparency

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 1-22
Author(s):  
Amy Kristin Sanders
Keyword(s):  
Low Income ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Attorney General ◽  
Public Information ◽  
People Of Color ◽  
Government Accountability ◽  
Personal Privacy ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Health Information ◽  
The Government

As the U.S. has grappled with COVID-19, the government has resisted repeated requests to follow open records laws, which are essential to transparency. Current efforts to reduce access to death records and other public information amid the pandemic jeopardizes government accountability and undermines the public’s trust. Given that COVID-19 has disproportionately affected low-income Americans, incarcerated populations and people of color, access to government-held data has serious implications for social justice. Importantly, those goals can be met without violating personal privacy. After analyzing state open records laws, court decisions and attorney general opinions, the author has developed a set of best practices for advocating access to death records to provide journalists and government watchdogs with important public health information that’s squarely in the public interest.

scholarly journals Charter Injunctions, Public Interest Presumption, and the Tyranny of the Majority

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-28
Author(s):  
Colin Feasby
Keyword(s):  
Public Service ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Attorney General ◽  
Minority Rights ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Short Article ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Face ◽  
The Government ◽  
Court Of Appeal

Quebec’s Bill 21, which seeks to restrict employees in its public service from displaying religious symbols at work, has attracted a number of constitutional challenges. In one of those challenges, Hak v Quebec (Attorney General), the plaintiffs sought an injunction suspending the operation of parts of Bill 21 pending a decision on the merits.1 Both the Quebec Superior Court and the Quebec Court of Appeal declined to issue an injunction. The majority of the Quebec Court of Appeal found that in enacting Bill 21 the legislature must be presumed to have acted in the public interest and, as such, the third part of the injunction test — balance of convenience — could not be satisfied. The idea that Parliament and provincial legislatures must be presumed to be acting in the public interest — what I will call the public interest presumption — is problematic in Charter cases concerning constraints of fundamental rights and the treatment of minorities. Parliament and provincial legislatures are majoritarian institutions; they are the product of elections where the candidates and parties with the most votes win. A core objective of the Charter is to protect minorities from being oppressed by the majority. Giving too much weight to a majoritarian conception of the public interest in interlocutory injunction applications concerning minority rights undermines the Charter and negates injunctions and stays as elective remedies, particularly where an applicant establishes real harm. To fulfill the Charter’s mandate to protect minority rights it must be recognized that the government does not have a monopoly on representing the public interest and that a majoritarian conception of the public interest cannot control the outcome of the balance of convenience test in the face of evidence that other aspects of the public interest are harmed by the impugned legislation. This short article argues for a much weaker public interest presumption: one that may be rebutted by an applicant adducing evidence of harm to an identifiable group. 1  Hak c Procureure Générale du Québec, 2019 QCCA 2145 [Hak].

scholarly journals Public Prosecutors to Defend the Public Interest

2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 301-316
Author(s):  
José P. Ribeiro de Albuquerque
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Criminal Policy ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Public Prosecution ◽  
Legal Representation ◽  
Constitutional Review ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Social ◽  
Legal Model ◽  
Public Prosecution Service

The preconditions for the question I want to address today are the social skills, duties and responsibilities of the Portuguese Public Prosecution Service. It is an independent and autonomous judicial body, based on a constitutional and legal model that confers functions on the Public Prosecution Service encompassing not only criminal prosecution and participation in the implementation of the criminal policy, but also the legal representation for employees, the promotion and protection of the welfare of children and young people, as well as the protection of collective and diffuse interests (environment, urban planning, public health, etc.), the safeguarding of the judicial independence and of the law, the enforcement of judicial decisions, the constitutional review and the promotion of the public interest. It is in the Public Prosecution´s powers of initiative in the public interest that I would like to focus on.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document