司法部长、政治和公共利益:对不断演变的制宪会议的贡献

IF 0.5 Q3 LAW Canadian Journal of Law and Society Pub Date : 2022-01-14 DOI:10.1017/cls.2021.42
Michael Murphy
{"title":"司法部长、政治和公共利益:对不断演变的制宪会议的贡献","authors":"Michael Murphy","doi":"10.1017/cls.2021.42","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"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.","PeriodicalId":45293,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Law and Society","volume":"37 1","pages":"209 - 228"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Attorney General, Politics, and the Public Interest: Contributions to an Evolving Constitutional Convention\",\"authors\":\"Michael Murphy\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/cls.2021.42\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"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.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45293,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Canadian Journal of Law and Society\",\"volume\":\"37 1\",\"pages\":\"209 - 228\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Canadian Journal of Law and Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/cls.2021.42\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Journal of Law and Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/cls.2021.42","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要总检察长的检察独立性是加拿大一项牢固确立的宪法公约,但它也是一项不断发展的公约,需要不断的争论和辩论。这篇文章是对这场辩论的贡献。它捍卫了一个规范的宪法框架,在该框架中,检察官在刑事起诉事项上做出最终决定的权力与在情况允许时就检察决定的公共利益影响与内阁和总理协商的相应义务相平衡。在这一规范性框架内,欢迎甚至鼓励部长、总理和检察官在确定起诉的公共利益价值方面进行相互尊重的辩论和辩论,如果以必要的完整性、客观性和透明度进行,它不是一种威胁,而是对检察官独立性的一种有价值的制衡,也是行使检察自由裁量权的一种不可或缺的质量控制形式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Attorney General, Politics, and the Public Interest: Contributions to an Evolving Constitutional Convention
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.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: The Canadian Journal of Law and Society is pleased to announce that it has a new home and editorial board. As of January 2008, the Journal is housed in the Law Department at Carleton University. Michel Coutu and Mariana Valverde are the Journal’s new co-editors (in French and English respectively) and Dawn Moore is now serving as the Journal’s Managing Editor. As always, the journal is committed to publishing high caliber, original academic work in the field of law and society scholarship. CJLS/RCDS has wide circulation and an international reputation for showcasing quality scholarship that speaks to both theoretical and empirical issues in sociolegal studies.
期刊最新文献
Reasonable Bail or Bail at All Costs? Defence Counsel Perspectives on a Coercive Environment L’éthique et l’éthos de la profession chez les avocats en droit criminel et en droit social Unthinkable, Thinkable, and Back Again: The Use of Incarceration in Ontario during the COVID-19 Pandemic Le recours aux modes alternatifs de règlement des conflits : une exploration au prisme d’une analyse des coûts humains et financiers de la justice Bad Religion and Bad Business: The History of the Canadian Witchcraft Provision
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1