scholarly journals (2012) 30 Windsor Y B Access Just 225 RE-EVALUATING INDEPENDENCE: THE EMERGING PROBLEM OF CROWN-POLICE ALIGNMENT

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 225 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeremy Tatum
Keyword(s):  
Present Article ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Crucial Role ◽  
Public Affairs ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Guilty Plea ◽  
The Public ◽  
Institutional Accountability ◽  
A Charge ◽  
High Level

Attorney Generals and Crown prosecutors are endowed with a constitutionally protected role and the quasi-judicial responsibility of handling criminal prosecutions on behalf of the Crown. This includes deciding whether to bring the prosecution of a charge laid by the police, to enter a stay of proceedings, to accept a guilty plea to lesser charge, and to withdraw criminal proceedings in accordance with what the public interest dictates.While the vast majority of prosecutors are careful to separate their function from that of the police, occasionally police advocacy and the high level of police commitment can lead to accepting police information without appropriate confirmation and turning to the police for guidance in the exercise of prosecutorial functions. This article argues that recent examples of significant partisan advocacy by prosecutors warrant re-considering the limits of Crown independence from the police and re-evaluating the current effectiveness of institutional accountability in Ontario.Part II will highlight the separate roles of the police and prosecutors, as well as provide some background to the issue of Crown-police alignment. Part III will examine a number of recent cases where individual prosecutors, and occasionally offices, appear to be acting in the interests of the police, rather than the public interest, in discharging their prosecutorial functions. Finally, because the problem of Crown-police alignment is provincial as well as localized in nature, part IV will attempt to demonstrate the crucial role that Law Societies and other public offices have in monitoring prosecutorial conduct and ensuring that Attorney Generals are in fact seeing that the administration of public affairs is in accordance with the law.Les procureurs généraux et les procureurs de la Couronne sont investis d’un rôle protégé par la Constitution et de la responsabilité quasi-judiciaire de s’occuper des poursuites criminelles au nom de l’État, ce qui comprend les fonctions suivantes : décider d’entreprendre une poursuite une fois qu’une accusation a été portée par la police; suspendre une instance; accepter un plaidoyer de culpabilité à une accusation réduite; mettre fin à une poursuite criminelle en raison des conséquences sur l’intérêt public.Même si la vaste majorité des procureurs prennent soin de ne pas confondre leur rôle avec celui de la police, il peut arriver, à l’occasion, que l’opinion policière et le haut niveau d’engagement de la police amènent des procureurs à accepter des renseignements policiers sans confirmation suffisante et à demander conseil à la police dans l’exercice de leurs fonctions. Le présent article soutient que des épisodes récents de représentations partisanes significatives par des poursuivants justifient le réexamen des limites de l’indépendance de la Couronne par rapport à la police et la réévaluation de l’efficacité actuelle de la responsabilisation des institutions en Ontario.La partie II fera ressortir les rôles distincts de la police et des procureurs de la poursuite et fournira quelques renseignements généraux sur la question de l’alignement des fonctions de la Couronne et de la police. La partie III examinera un nombre d’affaires récentes où des bureaux et des procureurs qui exercaient leurs fonctions de poursuivants, semblent avoir agi dans l’intérêt de la police plutôt que dans l’intérêt public. Finalement, parce que le problème de l’alignement des fonctions de la Couronne et la de police est, par nature, provincial et localisé, l’auteur tentera de démontrer, dans la partie IV, le rôle crucial que les barreaux et d’autres administrations publiques jouent lorsqu’il s’agit de surveiller le déroulement des poursuites et de veiller à ce que les procureurs généraux voient effectivement à ce que les affaires publiques soient administrées en conformité avec le droit.

scholarly journals Celebrity news as hybrid journalism: An assessment of celebrity coverage in Flemish newspapers and magazines

Journalism ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 44-63 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hilde Van den Bulck ◽  
Steve Paulussen ◽  
Annebeth Bels
Keyword(s):  
Content Analysis ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Genre Studies ◽  
Human Interest ◽  
The Public ◽  
Quantitative Content ◽  
High Level ◽  
Elite Newspapers ◽  
Celebrity News ◽  
Journalistic Quality

This contribution discusses the content and characteristics of celebrity news as a hybrid news genre by means of a quantitative content analysis of a random sample from 1 year of celebrity news as published in two elite and two popular Flemish newspapers, and two Flemish celebrity gossip magazines. To this end, a theoretical framework is developed that combines insights from celebrity studies regarding the characteristics of the celebrity as a mediated construct with insights from research on (the decline of) journalistic quality, as well as insights from genre studies on hybridity. Different from what the literature suggests, the results indicate a certain dominance in celebrity news of the public over the private and a distinct attention to public interest next to human interest news, although results differ according to type of medium. The results also show clear indications both of original but sensationalized reporting in magazines and of a high level of ‘churnalism’ in (elite) newspapers. In the conclusion, the article suggests a need to pay more attention to ‘regular’ rather than exceptional celebrity news and a reconsideration of what is ‘wrong’ with celebrity news as indicative of what is ‘wrong’ with journalism in general, and shows that celebrity news is a hybrid genre in three different ways.

Once the conviction has been set aside, there could be no public policy objection to an action for negligence against the legal advisers. There could be no conflict of judgments. On the other hand, in civil, including matrimonial, cases, it would seldom be possible to say that an action for negligence against a legal adviser or representative would bring the administration of justice into disrepute. Whether the original decision was right or wrong was usually a matter of concern only to the parties and had no wider implications. There was no public interest objection to a subsequent finding that, but for the negligence of his lawyers, the losing party would have won. But again there might be exceptions. The action for negligence might be an abuse of process on the ground that it was manifestly unfair to someone else. Take, for example, the case of a defendant who published a serious defamation which he attempted unsuccessfully to justify. Should he be able to sue his lawyers and claim that if the case had been conducted differently, the allegation would have been proved to be true? It seemed unfair to the plaintiff in the defamation action that any court should be allowed to come to such a conclusion in proceedings to which he was not a party. On the other hand, it was equally unfair that he should have to join as a party and rebut the allegation for a second time. A man's reputation was not only a matter between him and the other party. It represented his relationship with the world. So it might be that in such circumstances, an action for negligence would be an abuse of the of the court. Having regard to the power of the court to strike out actions which had no prospect ofsuccess, the doctrine unlikely in that context to be invoked very often. The first step in any application to strike out an action alleging negligence in the conduct of a previous action had to be to ask whether it had a real prospect of success. Lord Hope, Lord Hutton and Lord Hobhouse delivered judgments in which they agreed that the immunity from suit was no longer required in relation to civil proceedings but dissented to the extent of saying that the immunity was still required in the public interest in the administration of justice in relation to criminal proceedings. Comment This decision is of major and historic importance in the English legal system for several reasons. It can be seen as a bold attempt by the senior judiciary to drag the legal profession (often a metonymy for the whole legal system) into the 21st century world of accountability and fair business practice. In his judgment, Lord Steyn makes this dramatic observation:

2012 ◽  
pp. 506-508
Keyword(s):  
Legal System ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
The Other ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
The Public ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Civil Proceedings ◽  
Administration Of Justice ◽  
Legal Adviser ◽  
To Come

Fighting Corruption While Having Hands Tied: A Case Study of Thailand’s Public Sector Anti-Corruption Commission

2020 ◽  
pp. 002190962092652
Author(s):  
Dhiyathad Prateeppornnarong
Keyword(s):  
Public Sector ◽  
Public Participation ◽  
Present Article ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Regulatory Oversight ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Core ◽  
High Level ◽  
Overall Effectiveness

Grounded in 41 semi-structured interviews, this article examines the extent to which the complaints system under regulatory oversight of the Public Sector Anti-Corruption Commission (PACC) in Thailand has been effective for addressing corruption complaints. The present article revisits the theoretical arguments of the structural school and the reputational school over agency independence, deploying such arguments to analyze the way in which de facto independence of the anti-corruption agencies (ACAs) operating in a highly politicized environment can be protected. The analysis finds that a high level of legal independence is the best possible way to safeguard de facto independence, enhancing the overall effectiveness of the ACAs working in highly politicized countries. In addition, the empirical findings suggest that a low level of legal independence, a lack of prosecution power, inadequate qualified staffing, and the absence of meaningful public participation are the core factors contributing to the ineffectiveness of the PACC system.

The Medium Versus the Message: The Issue of Access to TV News

1976 ◽  
Vol 9 (03) ◽  
pp. 270-273
Author(s):  
Richard A. Pride
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Television News ◽  
Public Affairs ◽  
The Public ◽  
Tv News ◽  
The University ◽  
Near Future ◽  
News Programs ◽  
Vanderbilt University ◽  
Source Of Information

The decade of the 1960's was a tumultuous period for the American polity, and thus far the 1970's have been equally so, if for different reasons. During these same years network news programs emerged as America's most used and most trusted source of information about national affairs. Taken together, these news programs have given us a dramatic and interpretive record of our time. Strange as it may seem, until 1968 no one—not even the networks themselves—maintained an archive of television news tapes. While an interested person could have reviewed past editions of newspapers and magazines at a local library, past television newscasts were not available for study until Vanderbilt University acted.The Vanderbilt Television News Archive has videotaped the three networks' evening news programs off-the-air in Nashville since August, 1968. The archive has also taped other historic public affairs programs, including presidential nominating conventions, the Senate Watergate Hearings, and the Judiciary Committee's impeachment proceedings.From the beginning Vanderbilt informed the networks that it was archiving this material because the public interest required that it be saved and made available for research.In December, 1973, CBS brought suit against the university to stop the Vanderbilt effort. A trial may occur in the near future.

scholarly journals О РАСШИРЕНИИ КОМПЕТЕНЦИИ ПРОКУРОРА ПО УГОЛОВНЫМ ПРАВОНАРУШЕНИЯМ ЭКСТРЕМИСТСКОЙ И ТЕРРОРИСТИЧЕСКОЙ НАПРАВЛЕННОСТИ

2021 ◽  
pp. 133-137
Author(s):  
Talgat Khanov ◽  
Nazerke Tusupova
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
The State ◽  
Ministry Of Education ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
The Public ◽  
Science Committee ◽  
Criminal Offenses ◽  
The Republic

The article analyzes the proposals made by Kazakhstani process specialists on the use of the institute of special proceedings in the investigation of criminal cases of terrorism and extremism. The article analyzes the possibility of restricting certain rights and freedoms of interested participants in criminal proceedings. The article examines the need to strengthen the public interest of the state in the pre-trial investigation of offenses related to extremism and terrorism. The authors support the suggestions made and formulate their own vision for the voiced problem. It is proposed to expand the competence of the prosecutor by providing him / her with alternative or generic jurisdiction at the legislative level, making it mandatory to conduct pre-trial investigations of criminal offenses of extremist and terrorist orientation, According to the authors, this approach will help instill investigative skills in prosecutors and increase the effectiveness of the fight against extremism and terrorism. The article was prepared as part of the implementation of the grant financing agreement by the Science Committee of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Republic of Kazakhstan (IRN of the AP08856905 project). В статье анализируются внесенные казахстанскими процессуалистами предложения по использованию института особых производств применительно к расследованию уголовных дел о терроризме и экстремизме. Рассматривается возможность ограничения отдельных прав и свобод заинтересованных участников уголовного процесса. Исследуется необходимость усиления публичного интереса государства при досудебном расследовании правонарушений, связанных с экстремизмом и терроризмом. Авторы поддерживают вносимые предложения и формулируют свое видение на озвученную проблему. Предлагается расширить компетенцию прокурора, на законодательном уровне закрепив за ним альтернативную или родовую подследственность, вменив в обязанность производство досудебного расследования уголовных правонарушений экстремистской и террористической направленности. По мнению авторов, данный подход будет способствовать привитию у прокурорских работников навыков следственной работы, повышению эффективности борьбы с экстремизмом и терроризмом, реальному обеспечению прав и законных интересов участников уголовного судопроизводства. Статья подготовлена в рамках выполнения договора на грантовое финансирование Комитетом науки Министерства образования и науки Республики Казахстан (ИРН проекта AP08856905). Мақалада терроризм және экстремизм бойынша қылмыстық істерді тергеуге қатысты арнайы іс жүргізу институтын қолдану бойынша қазақстандық процессуалистер жасаған ұсыныстар талданады. Қылмыстық процеске мүдделі қатысушылардың кейбір құқықтары мен бостандықтарын шектеу мүмкіндігі қарастырылуда. Мақалада экстремизм мен терроризмге қатысты құқық бұзушылықтарды сотқа дейінгі тергеп-тексеруде мемлекеттің қоғамдық мүддесін күшейту қажеттілігі қарастырылған. Авторлар ұсынылған ұсыныстарды қолдайды және айтылған мәселеге өз көзқарасын тұжырымдайды. Прокурордың құзыретін заңнамалық деңгейде кеңейту, ол үшін баламалы немесе жалпы юрисдикцияны қамтамасыз ету, оны экстремистік және террористік сипаттағы қылмыстық құқық бұзушылықтарды сотқа дейінгі тергеп-тексеру үшін жауапты ету ұсынылады. Авторлардың пікірінше, бұл тәсіл прокурорлардың жедел-іздестіру жұмысының дағдыларын қалыптастыруға, экстремизм мен терроризмге қарсы күрестің тиімділігін арттыруға, қылмыстық процеске қатысушылардың құқықтары мен заңды мүдделерін тиімді қамтамасыз етуге мүмкіндік береді. Мақала Қазақстан Республикасы Білім және ғылым министрлігі Ғылым комитетінің гранттық қаржыландыру келісімшарты (IRN жобасы AP08856905) аясында дайындалған.

10. Public interest immunity, closed material procedures, and disclosure

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maureen Spencer ◽  
John Spencer
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
National Security ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
The Public ◽  
Civil Proceedings ◽  
Civil Cases

This chapter, which deals with public interest immunity (PII) and disclosure in criminal and civil cases, first explains exclusion of evidence on the grounds of the PII doctrine in relation to the public interest in non-disclosure of documents. It then considers disclosure in criminal proceedings under the Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 (as amended by the Criminal Justice Act 2003) and the Criminal Procedure Rules 2014 as well as disclosure in civil proceedings under the Civil Procedure Rules. The chapter also examines areas of public interest that are covered by possible PII claims, including national security, defence and foreign policy, protection of children, the identity of police informers, and confidential records held by public bodies. It concludes with an outline of the Closed Material Procedures (CMPs).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document