Prosecution independence and accountability: principles,challenges and recommendations

This paper examines the independence and accountability of the prosecutor and the prosecution agency, principles that apply in those areas, challenges that may arise and recommendations for action that enable jurisdictions to comply with best practice in the field, strengthening the rule of law and contributing to good governance. The prosecution agency, through the conduct of its head and of individual prosecutors, plays a fundamental role in the proper administration of criminal justice. For it to operate efficiently and effectively, both government and the community must have confidence in it. That requires that it operate independently, according to well-established principles, and accountably. Challenges to those requirements may be met legislatively, structurally, managerially and operationally. A central issue discussed – especially in the context of small jurisdictions – is the desirability of having an independent Director of Public Prosecutions.     

Current developments in police governance and accountability in Ireland

2005 saw the passing of landmark legislation for policing in Ireland??the Garda Síochána Act??which made substantial changes to the structures and operation of governance and accountability. It came on the heels of the greatest scandal ever faced by the Irish police. This paper sets out to assess critically the impact of that legislation. We begin by considering the nature of police reform and the various conditions necessary for successful change. We then contextualise the reforms in Ireland, considering the existing structures of governance and accountability and highlighting the numerous concerns which existed in relation to them. The focus then turns to the Morris Tribunal, which documented gross misconduct and corruption in one Garda division. We examine how this served as a major catalyst for reform in Ireland. The paper then turns to consider the reforms themselves providing an overview of the legislation and critiquing in depth a number of features: the clear centralisation of government control over the police, the limited independence of the new independent police complaints body and the failure to fully embed the reforms in a human rights agenda. We conclude by arguing that insufficient steps have been taken to address police governance and accountability in Ireland and that the best opportunity for such reform may have been missed.     

Expert evidence and hearsay

In upholding the admission of expert evidence, some courts have held that hearsay information conveyed via an expert may be admitted as long as the jury is instructed to ignore the facts asserted in the hearsay statements and to use the information only for determining the weight to attribute to the expert's opinion. Results of a mock juror simulation indicated that although hearsay elements conveyed via an expert were perceived as less likely compared to a condition in which the information was independently admitted at trial, it was not completely ignored by the jurors. Further, the findings tended to suggest that the impact of the hearsay on verdict decisions operated primarily by influencing evaluations regarding the likelihood of the hearsay events as opposed to judgments regarding the expert testimony.     

Expert evidence: a practical guide

Legal context: expert witnesses now take part in many IP disputesand both experts and practitioners need to know the rules anddecisions affecting them. Key Points: we consider admissability of expert evidence, howto find an expert, appointment, how to change an expert, theexpert's duties, conflicts and the dangers of using an expert.It stresses the importance of finding an expert who knows thefield, will stick to it and communicates well. It is key notoversell or tempt the expert to oversell the evidence. Practitionersshould stay within the procedural rules, as mistakes can affectthe value of otherwise sound evidence. Practical significance: expert evidence is often decisive. Gettingit wrong can present a significant problem. English judges arenot slow to criticise any failure to meet the very high standardsthey expect of expert witnesses.     

The economic effects of judicial accountability: cross-country evidence

Judicial independence is not only a necessary condition for the impartiality of judges, it can also endanger it: judges that are independent could have incentives to remain uninformed, become lazy or even corrupt. It is therefore often argued that judicial independence and judicial accountability are competing ends. In this paper, it is hypothesized that they can be complementary means towards achieving impartiality and, in turn, the rule of law. It is further argued that judicial accountability can increase per capita income through various channels one of which is the reduction of corruption. First tests concerning the economic effects of JA are carried out and on the basis of 75 countries, these proxies are highly significant for explaining differences in per capita income drawing both on OLS as well as TSLS.

Police accountability and the Irish law of evidence

Common law courts have differed on whether and to what extent an exclusionary rule should be used as a tool to impose standards on the police. The Irish courts have pursued an uncompromising approach in this area. Basing themselves on the imperative of upholding the constitutional rights of the accused, they have been willing to exclude relevant and cogent evidence on the basis that it was obtained by the police in breach of those rights. This article locates the Irish constitutional exclusionary rule in the broader context of the role of the law of evidence in police governance. Citing specific examples from the Irish legislation and case law, it shows how recent legislative interventions and some judicial hesitancy have fuelled inconsistent and contradictory trends. It concludes that there is now a pressing need for reflection on the respective roles of the legislature and the courts in this area.     

Expert evidence. Historical perspectives

Nearly 150 years ago, a seaman received a blow on the right side in the liver region, dying a month later. As a result of fresh autopsy findings, the accused was arrested and imprisoned. However, the defense counsel obtained an exhumation order. This led to the discovery of coexisting lethal disease and culminated in full discharge by a grand jury. The various aspects of the case are examined and shown to anticipate modern principles of expert evidence.     

Intrusion detection: issues and challenges in evidence acquisition

As the dangers of hacking and cyber‐warfare for network security become a reality, the need to be able to generate legally admissible evidence of criminal or other illegal online behaviours has become increasingly important. While technical systems providing intrusion detection and network monitoring are constantly being improved, the security they provide is never absolute. As a result, when assessing the value and nature of the data that these systems produce, it becomes critical to be aware of a number of factors: these systems themselves are susceptible to attack and/or evasion; these systems may collect only a partial data set; and, these data sets may themselves be flawed, erroneous or may already have been tampered with. Additionally, the issue of privacy and data protection is emerging as a central debate in forensic computing research. In this context, this paper examines intrusion detection systems (IDS) and provides the results of a case study on the use of the SNORT IDS on a university department World Wide Web (WWW) server. The case study is analysed and discussed using a forensic computing perspective. This perspective considers the nature of the intrusion detection and network monitoring security provided and evaluates the system in terms of its evidence acquisition (‘forensic’) capabilities and the legal admissibility of the digital evidence generated.     

Addressing the accountability challenges of international policing in peace support operations

There is increasing concern over the behaviour and accountability of international personnel, including CIVPOL contingents, deployed in peace-keeping and peace-building missions throughout the world. From the point of view of local populations the ??internationals?? are typically perceived to be ??above the law??. This is directly related to the fact that under status of forces or mission agreements (SOFAs or SOMAs) they are exempt from local host state jurisdiction. There are also significant practical problems in gathering and presenting evidence for disciplinary or criminal proceedings in their home states. This paper will analyse these problems in detail, based on a study of some recent European Union and international missions and suggest how a more co-operative home and host state approach to monitoring, investigation and adjudication of alleged misconduct might achieve more effective accountability and thus contribute to the overall success of CIVPOL missions.     

同辈团体成员集体问责：行政问责中的可行方式

同辈团体成员为其个体行为共同负责，能够有效解决行政监督中信息不对称问题，这种问责方式在理论和现实运行中都是可行的,它能进一步完善我国现行的监督体系。