7/31/2019 Step on Every Rock Killing Serpents

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/step-on-every-rock-killing-serpents 1/25

Step on every rock killing serpents

PAGAN COIFPublished Attorney General Authority Nuances Conflict of Interest Fiduciary

Attorney General wears no clothes - too many HATS - Honor Among Thieves Systemic

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_of_interest A conflict of interest (COI) occurs when an individual or organization is involved in multiple interests,one of which could possibly corrupt the motivation for an act in the other.The presence of a conflict of interest is independent from the execution of impropriety. Therefore, aconflict of interest can be discovered and voluntarily defused before any corruption occurs. A widelyused definition is: “A conflict of interest is a set of circumstances that creates a risk that professional judgment or actions regarding a primary interest will be unduly influenced by a secondaryinterest.”[1] Primary interest refers to the principal goals of the profession or activity, such as the protection of clients, the health of patients, the integrity of research, and the duties of publicoffice. Secondary interest includes not only financial gain but also such motives as the desire for 

 professional advancement and the wish to do favors for family and friends, but conflict of interest rulesusually focus on financial relationships because they are relatively more objective, fungible, andquantifiable. The secondary interests are not treated as wrong in themselves, but become objectionablewhen they are believed to have greater weight than the primary interests. The conflict in a conflict of interest exists whether or not a particular individual is actually influenced by the secondary interest. Itexists if the circumstances are reasonably believed (on the basis of past experience and objectiveevidence) to create a risk that decisions may be unduly influenced by secondary interests.William K. Black insists that "Conflicts of interest matter."[2] In the run up to the Savings and loancrisis of the 1980s and early 1990s, control frauds like Charles Keating were able to get legislators likeSpeaker of the House Jim Wright, the Keating Five Senators and majorities in both the US House andSenate to suppress investigations of massive criminality until their Ponzi schemes finally collapses.Only then did citizen pressure and media involvement force political action. Then regulators filedthousands of criminal referrals that translated into over a thousand felony convictions. Thecurrent foreclosure and Subprime mortgage crisis is similar to the run up to the S&L crisis with zerocriminal referrals and zero prosecutions of key finance executives. Black calls this the de factodecriminalization of elite financial fraud.[3] As with the S&L crisis, the current situation is facilitated by conflicts of interest in the media and the US system of privately funded political campaigns.

Contents[hide]

1 Conflicts of interest related to the practice of law2 Conflicts of interest generally (unrelated to the practice of law)3 Organizational conflict of interest

4 Relationship to medical research5 Types of conflicts of interests6 Examples6.1 Environmental Hazards and Human Health6.2 Self-Policing6.3 Insurance Claims Adjusters6.4 Purchasing Agents and Sales Personnel6.5 Governmental Officials6.6 Finance Industry and Elected Officials

7/31/2019 Step on Every Rock Killing Serpents

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/step-on-every-rock-killing-serpents 2/25

6.7 Finance Industry and economists6.8 Media7 Ways to mitigate conflicts of interests7.1 Removal7.2 Disclosure7.3 Recusal

7.4 Third-party evaluations8 See also9 External links10 Further reading11 References

[edit]Conflicts of interest related to the practice of law

Professional responsibility

Duties to the client

ConfidentialityAvoiding conflict of interest

Diligence and competenceAvoid comminglingAvoid self-dealingEffective assistanceAvoid fee splittingWithdrawal from representation

Duties to the court

Disclosure of  perjuryDisclosure of adverse authority

Duties to the profession

Limitations on legal advertisingReport misconduct

Sources of law

ABA Model Rules

Penalties for misconduct

Disbarment Judicial misconduct

v t e

Judicial disqualification, also referred to as recusal, refers to the act of abstaining from participation inan official action such as a legal proceeding due to a conflict of interest of the  presiding courtofficial or administrative officer. Applicable statutes or canons of ethicsmay provide standards for 

7/31/2019 Step on Every Rock Killing Serpents

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/step-on-every-rock-killing-serpents 3/25

recusal in a given proceeding or matter. Providing that the judge or presiding officer must be free fromdisabling conflicts of interest makes the fairness of the proceedings less likely to be questioned.[4]In the legal profession, the duty of loyalty owed to a client prohibits an attorney (or a law firm) fromrepresenting any other party with interests adverse to those of a current client. The few exceptions tothis rule require informed written consent from all affected clients. In some circumstances, a conflict of interest can never be waived by a client. In perhaps the most common example encountered by the

general public, the same firm should not represent both parties in a divorce or child custody case.A prohibited or undisclosed representation involving a conflict of interest can subject an attorney todisciplinary hearings, the denial or disgorgement of legal fees, or in some cases (such as the failure tomake mandatory disclosure), criminal proceedings. In the United States, a law firm usually cannotrepresent a client if its interests conflict with those of another client, even if they have separate lawyerswithin the firm, unless (in some jurisdictions) the lawyer is segregated from the rest of the firm for theduration of the conflict. Law firms often employ software in conjunction with their case managementand accounting systems in order to meet their duties to monitor their conflict of interest exposure andto assist in obtaining waivers.[edit]Conflicts of interest generally (unrelated to the practice of law)

Sociology

Outline

Theory · History

Positivism · AntipositivismFunctionalism · Conflict theoryMiddle-range · MathematicalCritical theory · Socialization

Structure and agency

Research methods

Quantitative · QualitativeHistorical · ComputationalEthnographic · Network analytic

Topics · Subfields

Cities · Class · Crime · CultureDeviance · Demography · EducationEconomy · Environment · Family

Gender · Health · Industry · InternetKnowledge · Law · Literature ·Medicine · Politics · Mobility ·Race andethnicity · Rationalization ·Religion · Science · Secularization ·Socialnetworks · Social psychology ·Stratification

Browse

PortalCategory tree · ListsJournals · Sociologists

7/31/2019 Step on Every Rock Killing Serpents

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/step-on-every-rock-killing-serpents 4/25

Article index

v t e

More generally, conflicts of interest can be defined as any situation in which an individual or corporation (either private or governmental) is in a position to exploit a professional or officialcapacity in some way for their personal or corporate benefit.Depending upon the law or rules related to a particular organization, the existence of a conflict of interest may not, in and of itself, be evidence of wrongdoing. In fact, for many professionals, it isvirtually impossible to avoid having conflicts of interest from time to time. A conflict of interest can,however, become a legal matter for example when an individual tries (and/or succeeds in) influencingthe outcome of a decision, for personal benefit. A director or executive of a corporation will be subjectto legal liability if a conflict of interest breaches his/her Duty of Loyalty.There often is confusion over these two situations. Someone accused of a conflict of interest may denythat a conflict exists because he/she did not act improperly. In fact, a conflict of interest can exist even

if there are no improper acts as a result of it. (One way to understand this is to use the term "conflict of roles". A person with two roles—an individual who owns stock and is also a government official, for example—may experience situations where those two roles conflict. The conflict can be mitigated— see below—but it still exists. In and of itself, having two roles is not illegal, but the differing roles willcertainly provide an incentive for improper acts in some circumstances.)As an example, in the sphere of business and control, according to the Institute of Internal Auditors:conflict of interest is a situation in which an internal auditor , who is in a position of trust, has acompeting professional or personal interest. Such competing interests can make it difficult to fulfill hisor her duties impartially. A conflict of interest exists even if nounethical or improper act results. Aconflict of interest can create an appearance of impropriety that can undermine confidence in theinternal auditor , the internal audit activity, and the profession. A conflict of interest could impair an

individual's ability to perform his or her duties and responsibilities objectively.[5][6][edit]Organizational conflict of interestAn organizational conflict of interest (OCI) may exist in the same way as described above, in the realmof the private sector providing services to the Government, where a corporation provides two types of services to the Government that have conflicting interest or appear objectionable (i.e.: manufacturing parts and then participating on a selection committee comparing parts manufacturers). Corporationsmay develop simple or complex systems to mitigate the risk or perceived risk of a conflict of interest.These risks are typically evaluated by a governmental office (for example, in a US Government  RFP)to determine whether the risks pose a substantial advantage to the private organization over thecompetition or will decrease the overall competitiveness in the bidding process.[edit]Relationship to medical research

The influence of the  pharmaceutical industry on medical research has been a major cause for concern.In 2009 a study found that "a number of academic institutions" do not have clear guidelines for relationships between Institutional Review Boards and industry.[7][edit]Types of conflicts of interestsThe following are the most common forms of conflicts of interests:Self-dealing, in which an official who controls an organization causes it to enter into a transaction withthe official, or with another organization that benefits the official. The official is on both sides of the"deal."Outside employment, in which the interests of one job contradict another.

7/31/2019 Step on Every Rock Killing Serpents

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/step-on-every-rock-killing-serpents 5/25

Family interests, in which a spouse, child, or other close relative is employed (or applies for employment) or where goods or services are purchased from such a relative or a firm controlled by arelative. For this reason, many employment applications ask if one is related to a current employee. If this is the case, the relative could then recuse from any hiring decisions. Abuse of this type of conflictof interest is called nepotism.Gifts from friends who also do business with the person receiving the gifts. (Such gifts may include

non-tangible things of value such as transportation and lodging.)Pump and dump, in which a stock broker who owns a security artificially inflates the price by"upgrading" it or spreading rumors, sells the security and adds short position, then "downgrades" thesecurity or spreads negative rumors to push the price down.Other improper acts that are sometimes classified as conflicts of interests are probably better classifiedelsewhere. Accepting bribes can be classified as corruption; almost everyone in a position of authority, particularly public authority, has the potential for such wrongdoing. Similarly, use of government or corporate property or assets for personal use is fraud, and classifying this as a conflict of interest doesnot improve the analysis of this problem. Nor should unauthorized distribution of confidentialinformation, in itself, be considered a conflict of interest. For these improper acts, there is no inherentconflict of roles (see above), unless being a (fallible) human being rather than (say) a robot in a

 position of power or authority is considered to be a conflict.COI is sometimes termed competition of interest rather than "conflict", emphasizing a connotation of natural competition  between valid interests rather than violent conflict with its connotation of victimhood and unfair aggression. Nevertheless, denotatively, there is too much overlap between theterms to make any objective differentiation.[edit]Examples[edit]Environmental Hazards and Human HealthBaker [8] summarized 176 studies of the potential impact of  Bisphenol A on human health as follows:[9]

Funding Harm No Harm

Industry 0 13 (100%)

Independent (e.g.,government)

152 (86%) 11 (14%)

Lessig[10] noted that this does not mean that the funding source influenced the results. However, itdoes raise questions about the validity of the industry-funded studies specifically, because theresearchers conducting those studies have a conflict of interest; they are subject at minimum to anatural human inclination to please the people who paid for their work. Lessig provided a similar summary of 326 studies of the potential harm from cell phone usage with results that were similar butnot as stark.[11][edit]Self-PolicingSelf-policing of any group is also a conflict of interest. If any organization, such as a corporation or 

government bureaucracy, is asked to eliminate unethical behavior within their own group, it may be intheir interest in the short run to eliminate the appearance of unethical behavior, rather than the behavior itself, by keeping any ethical breaches hidden, instead of exposing and correcting them. An exceptionoccurs when the ethical breach is already known by the public. In that case, it could be in the group'sinterest to end the ethical problem to which the public has knowledge, but keep remaining breacheshidden.[edit]Insurance Claims AdjustersInsurance companies retain claims adjusters to represent their interest in adjusting claims. It is in the best interest of the insurance companies that the very smallest settlement is reached with its claimants.

7/31/2019 Step on Every Rock Killing Serpents

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/step-on-every-rock-killing-serpents 6/25

Based on the adjuster's experience and knowledge of the insurance policy it is very easy for theadjuster to convince an unknowing claimant to settle for less than what they may otherwise be entitledwhich could be a larger settlement. There is always a very good chance of a conflict of interest to existwhen one adjuster tries to represent both sides of a financial transaction such as an insurance claim.This problem is exacerbated when the claimant is told, or believes, the insurance company's claimsadjuster is fair and impartial enough to satisfy both theirs and the insurance company's interests. These

types of conflicts could be easily be avoided by the use of disclosures.[edit]Purchasing Agents and Sales PersonnelA person working as the equipment purchaser for a company may get a bonus proportionate to theamount he's under budget by year end. However, this becomes an incentive for him to purchaseinexpensive, substandard equipment. Therefore, this is counter to the interests of those in his companywho must actually use the equipment. W. Edwards Deminglisted "purchasing on price alone" asnumber 4 of his famous 14 points, and he often said things to the effect that "He who purchases on price alone deserves to get rooked."[edit]Governmental OfficialsRegulating conflict of interest in government is one of the aims of   political ethics. Public officials areexpected to put service to the public and their constituents ahead of their personal interests. Conflict of 

interest rules are intended to prevent officials from making decisions in circumstances that couldreasonably be perceived as violating this duty of office. Rules in the executive branch tend to bestricter and easier to enforce than in the legislative branch.[12] Two problems make legislative ethicsof conflicts difficult and distinctive.[13] First, as James Madison wrote, legislators should share a"communion of interests" with their constituents. Legislators cannot adequately represent the interestsof constituents without also representing some of their own. As Senator Robert S. Kerr once said, "Irepresent the farmers of Oklahoma, although I have large farm interests. I represent the oil business inOklahoma . . . and I am in the oil business. . . . They don't want to send a man here who has nocommunity of interest with them, because he wouldn't be worth a nickel to them." [14] The problem isto distinguish special interests from the general interests of all constituents. Second, the “politicalinterests” of legislatures include campaign contributions which they need to get elected, and which aregenerally not illegal and not the same as a bribe. But under many circumstances they can have thesame effect. The problem here is how to keep the secondary interest in raising campaign funds fromoverwhelming what should be their primary interest: fulfilling the duties of office.Politics in the US is dominated in many ways by political campaign contributions.[4] Candidates areoften not considered "credible" unless they have a campaign budget far beyond what could reasonably be raised from citizens of ordinary means. The pernicious impact of this money can be found in many places, most notably in studies of how campaign contributions affect legislative behavior. For example,the price of sugar in the US has been roughly double the international price for over half a century. Inthe 1980s, this added $3 billion to the annual budget of US consumers, according to Stern,[15] who provided the following summary of one part of how this happens:

Contributions from the sugar lobby, 1983– 

1986

Percent voting in 1985 against gradually reducing sugar 

subsidies> $5,000 100%

$2,500 - $5,000 97%

$1,000 - $2,500 68%

$1 – $1,000 45%

$0 20%

7/31/2019 Step on Every Rock Killing Serpents

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/step-on-every-rock-killing-serpents 7/25

This $3 billion translates into $41 per household per year. This is in essence a tax collected by anongovernmental agency: It is a cost imposed on consumers by governmental decisions, but never considered in any of the standard data on tax collections.Stern notes that sugar interests contributed $2.6 million to political campaigns, representing well over $1,000 return for each $1 contributed to political campaigns. This, however, does not include the costof lobbying. Lessig [16] cites six different studies that consider the cost of lobbying with campaign

contributions on a variety of issues considered in Washington, DC. These studies produced estimatesof the anticipated return on each $1 invested in lobbying and political campaigns that ranged from $6to $220. Lessig notes that clients who pay tens of millions of dollars to lobbyists typically receive billions.Lessig,[10] insists that this does not mean that any legislator has sold his or her vote. One of several possible explanations Lessig gives for this phenomenon is that the money helped elect candidates moresupportive of the issues pushed by the big money spent on lobbying and political campaigns. He notesthat if any money perverts democracy, it is the large contributions beyond the budgets of citizens of ordinary means; small contributions from common citizens have long been considered supporting of democracy.[17]When such large sums become virtually essential to a politician's future, it generates a substantive

conflict of interest contributing to a fairly well documented distortion on the nation's priorities and policies.Beyond this, governmental officials, whether elected or not, often leave public service to work for companies affected by legislation they helped enact or companies they used to regulate or companiesaffected by legislation they helped enact. This practice is called the Revolving door . Former legislatorsand regulators are accused of (a) using inside information for their new employers or (b)compromising laws and regulations in hopes of securing lucrative employment in the private sector.This possibility creates a conflict of interest for all public officials whose future may depend onthe Revolving door .[edit]Finance Industry and Elected OfficialsConflicts of interest among elected officials is part of the story behind the increase in the percent of UScorporate domestic profits captured by the finance industry depicted in that accompanying figure.

Finance as a Percent of US Domestic Corporate Profit (Finance includes banks, securities andinsurance. In 1932-1933, the total US domestic corporate profit was negative. However, the financial

sector made a profit in those years, which made its percentage negative, below 0 and off the scale inthis plot.)From 1934 through 1985, the finance industry averaged 13.8% of US domestic corporate profit.Between 1986 and 1999, it averaged 23.5%. From 2000 through 2010, it averaged 32.6%. Some of thisincrease is doubtless due to increased efficiency from banking consolidation and innovations in newfinancial products that benefit consumers. However, if most consumers had refused to accept financial products they did not understand, e.g., negative amortization loans, the finance industry would nothave been as profitable as it has been, and the Late-2000s recession might have been avoided or  postponed. Stiglitz[18] noted that the Late-2000s recession was created in part because, "Bankers acted

7/31/2019 Step on Every Rock Killing Serpents

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/step-on-every-rock-killing-serpents 8/25

greedily because they had incentives and opportunities to do so". They did this in part by innovating tomake consumer financial products like retail banking services and home mortgages as complicated as possible to make it easy for them to charge higher fees. Consumers who shop carefully for financialservices typically find better options than the primary offerings of the major banks. However, fewconsumers think to do that. This explains part of this increase in financial industry profits.However, a major portion of this increase and a driving force behind Late-2000s recession has been the

corrosive effect of money in politics, giving legislators and the President of the US a conflict of interest, because if they protect the public, they will offend the finance industry, which contributed$1.7 billion to political campaigns and spent $3.4 billion ($5.1 billion total) on lobbying from 1998 to2008.[19][20] [21]To be conservative, suppose we attribute only the increase from 23.5% of 1986 through 1999 to therecent 32.6% average to governmental actions subject to conflicts of interest created by the $1.7 billionin campaign contributions. That's 9% of the $3 trillion in profits claimed by the finance industry duringthat period or $270 billion. This represents a return of over $50 for each $1 invested in politicalcampaigns and lobbying for that industry. (This $270 billion represents almost $1,000 for every many,woman and child in the US.) There is hardly any place outside of politics with such a high return oninvestment in such a short time.

[edit]Finance Industry and economistsEconomists (unlike other professions such as sociologists) do not formally subscribe to a professionalethical code. Close to 300 economists have signed a letter urging theAmerican EconomicAssociation (the discipline’s foremost professional body), to adopt such a code. The signatoriesinclude George Akerlof , a Nobel laureate, and Christina Romer , who headed Barack Obama’s Councilof Economic Advisers.[22]This call for a code of ethics was supported by the public attention the documentary Inside Job (winner of an Academy Award) drew to the consulting relationships of several influential economists.[23] Thisdocumentary focused on conflicts that may arise when economists publish results or provide publicrecommendation on topics that affect industries or companies with which they have financial links.Critics of the profession argue, for example, that it is no coincidence that financial economists, manyof whom were engaged as consultants by Wall Street firms, were opposed to regulating the financialsector.[24]In response to criticism that the profession not only failed to predict the 2007-2008 financial crisis butmay actually have helped create it, the American Economic Association has adopted new rules in2012 : economists will have to disclose financial ties and other potential conflicts of interest in papers published in academic journals. Backers argue such disclosures will help restore faith in the profession by increasing transparency which will help in assessing economists' advice.[25][edit]MediaAny media organization has a conflict of interest in discussing anything that may impact its ability tocommunicate as it wants with its audience. For example, the Wikimedia Foundation has a conflict of interest in discussing the Stop Online Piracy Act or any other legislation or governmental action thatcould impact its ability to deliver content to its intended audience.The business model of commercial media organizations (i.e., any that accept advertising) is selling behavior change in their audience to advertisers.[26][27][28] However, few in their audience are awareof the conflict of interest between the profit motive and the altruistic desire to serve the public and"give the audience what it wants."Many major advertisers test their ads in various ways to measure the return on investment inadvertising. Advertising rates are set as a function of the size and spending habits of the audience asmeasured by the Nielsen Ratings. Media action expressing this conflict of interest is evident in thereaction of Rupert Murdoch, Chairman of  News Corp., owner of Fox, to changes in data collectionmethodology adopted in 2004 by the Nielsen Company to more accurately measure viewing habits.

7/31/2019 Step on Every Rock Killing Serpents

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/step-on-every-rock-killing-serpents 9/25

The results corrected a previous overestimate of the market share of  Fox. Murdoch reacted by gettingleading politicians to denounce the Nielsen Ratings as racists. Susan Whiting, president and CEO of  Nielsen Media Research, responded by quietly sharing Neilsen's data with her leading critics. Thecriticism disappeared, and Fox paid Nielsen's fees.[29] Murdoch had a conflict of interest between thereality of his market and his finances.Commercial media organization lose money if they provide content that offends either their audience

or their advertisers. The substantial media consolidation that occurred since the 1980s has reduced thealternatives available to the audience, thereby making it easier for the ever larger companies in thisincreasingly oligopolistic industry to hide news and entertainment potentially offensive to advertiserswithout losing audience. If the media provide too much information on how congress spends its time, amajor advertiser could be offended and could reduce their advertising expenditures with the offendingmedia company; indeed, this is one of the ways the market system has determined which companieswon and which either went out of business or were purchased by others in this media consolidation.(Advertisers don't like to feed the mouth that bites them, and often don't. Similarly, commercial mediaorganizations are not eager to bite the hand that feeds them.) Advertisers have been known to fundmedia organizations with editorial policies they find offensive if that media outlet provides access to asufficiently attractive audience segment they cannot efficiently reach otherwise.

Election years are a major boon to commercial broadcasters, because virtually all political advertisingis purchased with minimal advance planning, paying therefore the highest rates. The commercial mediahave a conflict of interest in anything that could make it easier for candidates to get elected with lessmoney.[27]Accompanying this trend in media consolidation has been a substantial reduction in investigative journalism,[27] reflecting this conflict of interest between the business objectives of the commercialmedia and the public's need to know what government is doing in their name. This change has beentied to substantial changes in law and culture in the US. To cite only one example, researchers havetied this decline in investigative journalism to an increased coverage of the "police blotter".[30] Thishas further been tied to the fact that the United States has the highest incarceration rate in the world.Beyond this, virtually all commercial media companies own substantial quantities of copyrightedmaterial. This gives them an inherent conflict of interest in any public policy issue affectingcopyrights. McChesney noted that the commercial media have lobbied successfully for changes incopyright law that have led "to higher prices and a shrinking of the marketplace of ideas", increasingthe power and profits of the large media corporations at public expense. One result of this is that "the people cease to have a means of clarifying social priorities and organizing social reform".[31] A freemarket has a mechanism for controlling abuses of power by media corporations: If their censorship becomes too egregious, they lose audience, which in turn reduces their advertising rates. However, theeffectiveness of this mechanism has been substantially reduced over the past quarter century by "thechanges in the concentration and integration of the media."[32] Would the Anti-Counterfeiting TradeAgreement have advanced to the point of generating substantial  protests without the secrecy behindwhich that agreement was negotiated—and would the government attempts to sustain that secrecy have been as successful if the commercial media had not been a primary beneficiary and had not had aconflict of interest in suppressing discussion thereof?[edit]Ways to mitigate conflicts of interests[edit]RemovalThe best way to handle conflicts of interests is to avoid them entirely. For example, someone elected to political office might sell all corporate stocks that they own before taking office, and resign from allcorporate boards. Or that person could move their corporate stocks to a special trust, which would beauthorized to buy and sell without disclosure to the owner. (This is referred to as a " blind trust".) Withsuch a trust, since the politician does not know in which companies they have investments, thereshould be no temptation to act to their advantage.

7/31/2019 Step on Every Rock Killing Serpents

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/step-on-every-rock-killing-serpents 10/25

[edit]DisclosureCommonly, politicians and high-ranking government officials are required to disclose financialinformation - assets such as stock, debts such as loans, and/or corporate positions held, typicallyannually. To protect privacy (to some extent), financial figures are often disclosed in ranges such as"$100,000 to $500,000" and "over $2,000,000".Certain professionals are required either by rules related to their professional organization, or 

 by statute, to disclose any actual or potential conflicts of interest. In some instances, the failure to provide full disclosure is a crime.[edit]RecusalThose with a conflict of interest are expected to recuse themselves from (i.e., abstain from) decisionswhere such a conflict exists. The imperative for recusal varies depending upon the circumstance and profession, either as common sense ethics, codified ethics, or by statute. For example, if the governing board of a government agency is considering hiring a consulting firm for some task, and one firm being considered has, as a partner, a close relative of one of the board's members, then that boardmember should not vote on which firm is to be selected. In fact, to minimize any conflict, the boardmember should not participate in any way in the decision, including discussions.Judges are supposed to recuse themselves from cases when personal conflicts of interest may arise. For 

example, if a judge has participated in a case previously in some other judicial role he/she is notallowed to try that case. Recusal is also expected when one of the lawyers in a case might be a close personal friend, or when the outcome of the case might affect the judge directly, such as whether a car maker is obliged to recall a model that a judge drives. This is required by law under Continental civillaw systems and by theRome Statute, organic law of the International Criminal Court.[edit]Third-party evaluationsConsider a situation where the owner of a majority of a publicly held corporation decides to buy outthe minority shareholders and take the corporation private. What is a fair price? Obviously it isimproper (and, typically, illegal) for the majority owner to simply state a price and then have the(majority-controlled) board of directors approve that price. What is typically done is to hire anindependent firm (a third party), well-qualified to evaluate such matters, to calculate a "fair price",which is then voted on by the minority shareholders.Third-party evaluations may also be used as proof that transactions were, in fact, fair ("arm's-length").For example, a corporation that leases an office building that is owned by theCEO might get anindependent evaluation showing what the market rate is for such leases in the locale, to address theconflict of interest that exists between the fiduciary duty of the CEO (to the stockholders, by gettingthe lowest rent possible) and the personal interest of that CEO (to maximize the income that the CEOgets from owning that office building by getting the highest rent possible).conclusion Generally, forbid conflicts of interests. Often, however, the specifics can be controversial.Should therapists, such as  psychiatrists, be allowed to have extra-professional relations with patients,or ex-patients? Should a faculty member be allowed to have an extra-professional relationship with astudent, and should that depend on whether the student is in a class of, or being advised by, the facultymember?Codes of ethics help to minimize problems with conflicts of interests because they can spell out theextent to which such conflicts should be avoided, and what the parties should do where such conflictsare permitted by a code of ethics (disclosure, recusal, etc.). Thus, professionals cannot claim that theywere unaware that their improper behavior was unethical. As importantly, the threat of  disciplinaryaction (for example, a lawyer being disbarred) helps to minimize unacceptable conflicts or improper acts when a conflict is unavoidable.As codes of ethics cannot cover all situations, some governments have established an office of theethics commissioner . Ethics commissioner  should be appointed by thelegislature and should report tothe legislature.

7/31/2019 Step on Every Rock Killing Serpents

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/step-on-every-rock-killing-serpents 11/25

[edit]See alsoCommunity of interestCrony capitalismElectoral fraudFiduciaryInsider trading

Intra-household bargainingJudicial disqualificationJury nullificationLobbyingMedical ethicsMoney loopMoral hazardPerverse incentivePoliticsRecusalRevolving door (politics)

Tax resistanceUnited States Office of Government EthicsControversies surrounding Silvio Berlusconi[edit]External linksThacker, Paul D. (November 2006). "Environmental journals feel pressure to adopt disclosurerules". Environmental Science & Technology 40 (22): 6873–6875.doi:10.1021/es062808a.McDonald, Michael. "Ethics and Conflict of Interest". W. Maurice Young Centre for Applied Ethics.Archived from the original on 2007-11-03.[edit]Further readingBlack, William K. (2005). The Best Way to Rob a Bank Is to Own One. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press. ISBN 0-292-72139-0.Davis, Michael; Andrew Stark (2001). Conflict of interest in the professions. Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press. ISBN 0-19-512863-X.Lessig, Lawrence (2011). Republic, Lost: How Money Corrupts Congress -- and a Plan to Stop It.Twelve. ISBN 978-0-446-57643-7.Lo, Bernard; Marilyn J. Field (2009). Conflict of Interest in Medical Research, Education, andPractice. Washington DC: National Academies Press. ISBN 978-0-309-13188-9.Porter, Roger J.; Thomas E. Malone (1992). Biomedical research: collaboration and conflict of interest. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. ISBN 0-8018-4400-2.Thompson, Dennis (1995). Ethics in Congress: From Individual to InstitutionalCorruption. Washington DC: Brookings Institution Press. ISBN 0-8157-8423-6.Thompson, Dennis (1993). "Understanding financial conflicts of interest." New England Journal of Medicine 329 (8): 573-76. [edit]References^ Lo and Field (2009). The definition originally appeared in Thompson (1993).^ Black (2005, pp. 253-254)^ Black, William K. (Dec. 28, 2010). "2011 Will Bring More De facto Decriminalization of EliteFinancial Fraud". Next New Deal: Blog of the Roosevelt Institute. Black, William K. (20 August2012). "Black Report: No Criminal Prosecution of Wall St. and Who is the European, Romney or Obama?". The Real News.com. Retrieved Sept. 9, 2012.^ a  b Lessig 2011, pp. 29-32^ "1120-Individual Objectivity". Institute of Internal Auditors. Retrieved July 7, 2011.

7/31/2019 Step on Every Rock Killing Serpents

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/step-on-every-rock-killing-serpents 12/25

^ "Policies & Procedures of the Internal Audit Activity". City College of San Francisco. Retrieved July7, 2011.^ Policies regarding IRB members' industry relationships often lacking.^ Baker, Nena (2008). The Body Toxic. North Point Press. p. 142. [cited from Lessig 2011, p. 25 Laysummary].^ Fisher's exact test computed using the fisher.test function in R (programming language) returned a

significance probability of 2e-13, i.e., there are 200 chances in a million billion of getting a table asextreme as this with the given marginals by chance alone. In other words, it is not credible to claimthat the funding source has no impact on the outcome of this many independent studies.^ a  b Lessig 2011^ Lessig 2011, pp. 26-28^ Painter, Richard (2009), Getting the Government America Deserves: How Ethics Reform Can Makea Difference Oxford University Press 978-0-19-537871-9^ Thompson (1995)^ Kerr, Robert S. "Senator Kerr Talks about Conflict of Interest," US News and World Report,September 3, 1962, p. 86.^ Stern, Philip M. (1992). Still the Best Congress Money Can Buy. Regnery Gatgeway. pp. 168–176.

^ Lessig 2011, pp. 43-52, 117^ Lessig 2011, pp. 120-121^ Stiglitz, Joseph E. (2010). Freefall: America, Free Markets, and the Shrinking of the WorldEconomy. Norton. pp. 5–6.^ Lessig 2011, p. 83^ Sachs, Jeffrey D. (2011). The Price of Civilization: Reawakening American Virtue and Prosperity.Random House. ISBN 978-0-679-60502-7.^ Reinhart, Carmen M.; Rogoff, Kenneth S. (2009). This Time Is Different: Eight Centuries of Financial Folly. Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0-691-15264-6.^ Letters from 300 economists to the American Economic Association, 3 January 2011.]^ Wall Street Journal, Stung by 'Inside Job,' economists pen a code of ethics, 12 October 2011. ^ The Economist, Dismal ethics, An intensifying debate about the case for a professional code of ethicsfor economists, 6 January 2011.^ Wall Street Journal, Economists set rules on ethics, 9 January 2012.^ Herman, Edward S.; Chomsky, Noam (1988). Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of theMass Media. Pantheon. ISBN 0-394-54926-0. Retrieved 2012-02-09.^ a  b c McChesney, Robert W. (2004). The Problem of the Media: U.S. Communication Politics in the21st Century. Monthly Review Press. ISBN 1-58367-105-6. Retrieved 2012-02-09.^ McCheney, Robert W. (2008). The Political Economy of the Media: Enduring Issues, EmergingDilemmas. Monthly Review Press. ISBN 978-1-58367-161-0.^ Bianco, Anthony; Grover, Ronald (September 20, 2004), "How Nielsen Stood Up toMurdoch", Business Week ^ [|Potter, Gary W.]; [|Kappeler, Victor E.], eds. (1998). Constructing Crime: Perspectives on Making News and Social Problems. Waveland Press. ISBN 0-88133-984-9. Retrieved 2012-02-09.^ McChesney, Robert W. (2008). The Political Economy of the Media: Enduring Issues, EmergingDilemas. Monthly Review Pr.. pp. 335–337. ISBN 978-1-58367-161-0.^ Lessig, Lawrence (2004). Free Culture. pp. 162ff. ISBN 978-1-59420-006-9.Categories:Political corruptionLegal ethics

7/31/2019 Step on Every Rock Killing Serpents

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/step-on-every-rock-killing-serpents 13/25

http://www.scribd.com/doc/110394834/The-Bar-is-Used-to-Silence-People-Like-Richard-Fine

Continuedhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution 

 Ais a set of fundamental principles or established precedents according to which a state or other 

organization is governed.[1] These rules together make up, i.e. constitute, what the entity is. Whenthese principles are written down into a single collection or set of legal documents, those documents

may be said to comprise a written constitution.Constitutions concern different levels of organizations, from sovereign states to companies and

unincorporated associations. A treaty which establishes an international organization is also itsconstitution in that it would define how that organization is constituted. Within states, whether sovereign or federated, a constitution defines the principles upon which the state is based, the

 procedure in which laws are made and by whom. Some constitutions, especially written constitutions,also act as limiters of state power by establishing lines which a state's rulers cannot cross such as

fundamental rights.Generally, every modern written constitution confers specific powers to an organization or institutional entity,

established upon the primary condition that it

abides by the said constitution's limitations. According to Scott Gordon, a political organization is constitutional to the extent that it "contain[s] institutionalized

mechanisms of power control for 

the protection of the interests and liberties of the citizenry,including those that may be in the minority."[7]

Human rights are commonly understood as "inalienable fundamental rights to which a person is inherently entitled

simply because she or he is a human being."[1] Human rights are thus conceived as universal (applicable everywhere) and egalitarian (the same for everyone). These rights may exist as naturalrights or as legal rights, in both national and international law.[2] The doctrine of human rights in

7/31/2019 Step on Every Rock Killing Serpents

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/step-on-every-rock-killing-serpents 14/25

international practice, within international law, global and regional institutions, in the policies of states and in the activities of non-governmental organizations, has been a cornerstone of   public policy aroundthe world. The idea of human rights[3] states, "if the public discourse of peacetime global society can

 be said to have a common moral language, it is that of human rights."

Despite this, the strong claims made by the doctrine of human rights continue to provoke considerable

skepticism and debates about the content, nature and justifications of human rights to this day.Indeed,

the question of what is meant by a "right" is itself controversial and the subject of continued philosophical debate.[4]

Many of the basic ideas that animated the movement developed in the aftermath of the Second WorldWar  and the atrocities of The Holocaust, culminating in the adoption of theUniversal Declaration of Human Rights in Paris by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948. The ancient world did not possess the concept of universal human rights.[5]Ancient societies had "elaborate systems of duties...conceptions of justice, political legitimacy, and human flourishing that sought to realize humandignity, flourishing, or well-being entirely independent of human rights".[6] The modern concept of human rights developed during the early Modern period, alongside the European secularization of Judeo-Christian ethics.[7] The true forerunner of human rights discourse was the concept of naturalrights which appeared as part of the medieval Natural law tradition that became prominent during theEnlightenment with such philosophers as John Locke, Francis Hutcheson, and Jean-JacquesBurlamaqui, and featured prominently in the political discourse of the American Revolution and theFrench Revolution.From this foundation, the modern human rights arguments emerged over the latter half of the twentiethcentury. Gelling as social activism and political rhetoric in many nations put it high on the worldagenda.[8]All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason andconscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

 —Article 1 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)[9]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_Act,_1982The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is a  bill of rights.

The Charter is intended to protect certain political and civil rights of people in Canada 

****from****

the policies and actions of all levels of government.

It is also supposed to unify Canadians around a set of principles that embody those rights.[3][4]The Charter was preceded by the Canadian Bill of Rights, which was introduced by the government of 

John Diefenbaker in 1960.However, the Bill of Rights was only a federal statute, rather than a constitutional document.

Therefore, it was limited in scope and was easily amendable. This motivated some within governmentto improve rights protections in Canada.

The movement for human rights and freedoms that emerged after  World War II also wanted toentrench the principles enunciated in the

Universal Declaration of Human Rights.[5] 

7/31/2019 Step on Every Rock Killing Serpents

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/step-on-every-rock-killing-serpents 15/25

Hence, the government of Prime Minister  Pierre Trudeau enacted the Charter in 1982.Universal Declaration of Human Rights

The pursuit of human rights was a central reason for creating the UN. World War II atrocities and

genocide led to a ready consensus that the new organization must work to prevent any similar tragediesin the future. An early objective was creating a legal framework for considering and acting oncomplaints about human rights violations. The UN Charter obliges all member nations to promote

"universal respect for, and observance of, human rights" and to take "joint and separate action" to thatend. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 

though not legally binding, 

was adopted by the General Assembly in 1948 as a common standard of achievement for all. TheAssembly regularly takes up human rights issues.

A large share of UN expenditures addresses the core UN mission of peace and security. The peacekeeping budget for the 2005–2006 fiscal year was approximately US$5 billion, €2.5 billion

(compared to approximately US$1.5 billion, €995 million for the UN core budget over the same period), with some 70,000 troops deployed in 17 missions around the world.[60] UN peace operationsare funded by assessments, using a formula derived from the regular funding scale, but including aweighted surcharge for the five permanent Security Council members, who must approve all peacekeeping operations. This surcharge serves to offset discounted peacekeeping assessment rates for less developed countries. As of 1 January 2011, the top 10 providers of assessed financial contributionsto United Nations peacekeeping operations were: the United States, Japan, the United Kingdom,Germany, France, Italy, China, Canada, Spain and the Republic of Korea.[61]Special UN programmes not included in the regular budget (such as UNICEF, the WFP and UNDP)are financed by voluntary contributions from other member governments. Most of this is financialcontributions, but some is in the form of agricultural commodities donated for afflicted populations.Since their funding is voluntary, many of these agencies suffer severe shortages during economicrecessions.In July 2009, the World Food Programme reported that it has been forced to cut services because of insufficient funding.[62] It has received barely a quarter of the total it needed for the 09/10 financial year.

Many of the basic ideas that animated the movement developed in the aftermath of the Second WorldWar and the atrocities of the Holocaust, culminating in the adoption of the

Universal Declaration of Human

Rights in Paris by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948.

The ancient world did not possess the concept of universal human rights. [5] Ancient societies had"elaborate systems of duties... conceptions of justice, political legitimacy, and human flourishing thatsought to realize human dignity, flourishing, or well-being entirely independent of human rights".[6] 

The modern concept of human rights developed during the early Modern period, alongside theEuropean secularization of Judeo-Christian ethics.[7] The true forerunner of human rights discourse

was the concept of natural rights which appeared as part of the medieval Natural law tradition, became

7/31/2019 Step on Every Rock Killing Serpents

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/step-on-every-rock-killing-serpents 16/25

 prominent during the Enlightenment with such philosophers as John Locke, Francis Hutcheson, andJean-Jacques Burlamaqui, and featured prominently in the political discourse of the American

Revolution and the French Revolution.Multinational companies play an increasingly large role in the world, and have been responsible for 

numerous human rights abuses.[52] Although the legal and moral environment surrounding the actionsof governments is reasonably well developed, that surrounding multinational companies is both

controversial and ill-defined.[citation needed] Multinational companies' primary responsibility is totheir shareholders, not to those affected by their actions. Such companies may be larger than theeconomies of some of the states within which they operate, and can wield significant economic and political power. No international treaties exist to specifically cover the behavior of companies withregard to human rights, and national legislation is very variable. Jean Ziegler , Special Rapporteur of 

the UN Commission on Human Rights on the right to food stated in a report in 2003:

In August 2003 the Human Rights Commission's Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights produced draft Norms on the responsibilities of transnational corporations and other  business enterprises with regard to human rights.[54] These were considered by the Human Rights

Commission in 2004,

but have no binding status on corporations and are notmonitored.[55]

7/31/2019 Step on Every Rock Killing Serpents

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/step-on-every-rock-killing-serpents 17/25

www.SatanicLaw.com

http://www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/english/about/ag/agrole.asp

The Attorney General has a unique role to play as a Minister.

One part of the Attorney General's role is that of a Cabinet Minister. In this capacity the Minister is

responsible for representing the interests and perspectives of the Ministry at Cabinet, whilesimultaneously representing the interests and perspectives of Cabinet and consequently theGovernment to the Ministry and the Ministry's communities of interest.

The Attorney General is the chief law officer of the Executive Council. The responsibilities stemmingfrom this role are unlike those of any other Cabinet member.

The role has been referred to as "judicial-like" and as the "guardian of the public interest".

7/31/2019 Step on Every Rock Killing Serpents

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/step-on-every-rock-killing-serpents 18/25

Much has been written on the subject of ministerial responsibilities and the unique role of the AttorneyGeneral.

There are various components of the Attorney General's role. The Attorney General has uniqueresponsibilities to the Crown, the courts, the Legislature and the executive branch of government.While there are different emphases and nuances attached to these there is a general theme throughout

all the various aspects of the Attorney General's responsibilities that the office has a constitutional andtraditional responsibility beyond that of a political minister.

The statutory responsibilities of the office are found in section 5 of the Ministry of the Attorney

General Act . Section 5 states:The Attorney General,(a) is the Law Officer of the Executive Council;(b) shall see that the administration of public affairs is in accordance with the law;(c) shall superintend all matters connected with the administration of justice in Ontario;(d) shall perform the duties and have the powers that belong to the Attorney General and Solicitor General of England by law and usage, so far as those powers and duties are applicable to Ontario, and

also shall perform the duties and powers that, until the Constitution Act, 1867 came into effect, belonged to the offices of the Attorney General and Solicitor General in the provinces of Canada andUpper Canada and which, under the provisions of that Act, are within the scope of the powers of theLegislature;(e) shall advise the Government upon all matters of law connected with legislative enactments andupon all matters of law referred to him or her by the Government;(f) shall advise the Government upon all matters of a legislative nature and superintend all Governmentmeasures of a legislative nature;(g) shall advise the heads of ministries and agencies of Government upon all matters of law connectedwith such ministries and agencies;(h) shall conduct and regulate all litigation for and against the Crown or any ministry or agency of 

government in respect of any subject within the authority or jurisdiction of the Legislature;(i) shall superintend all matters connected with judicial offices;(j) shall perform such other functions as are assigned to him or her by the Legislature or by theLieutenant Governor in Council. "

What follows is an overview of the various components of the Attorney General's roles andresponsibilities, primarily as outlined in the Act.

Chief Law Officer of the Executive Council (s. 5(a))

The role of chief law officer might be referred to as the Attorney General's overall responsibility as the

independent legal advisor to the Cabinet - and some have even suggested that the role possibly extendsto the Legislature as well.

The importance of the independence of the role is fundamental

to the position and well established in common law, statutes and tradition.

7/31/2019 Step on Every Rock Killing Serpents

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/step-on-every-rock-killing-serpents 19/25

As chief law officer, the Attorney General has a

special responsibility 

to be the guardian of 

that most elusive concept- the rule of law.

The rule of law is a well established legal principle,but

hard to easily define. It is the rule of law

that protects individuals, and society as a whole, from arbitrary measures and safeguards personal liberties.

The Attorney General has

a special role to playin advising Cabinet

to ensure 

the rule of law is maintainedand

 that Cabinet actions are legally and constitutionally valid.

In providing such advice it is important to keep in mind the distinction between the Attorney General's policy advice and preference and the legal advice being presented to Cabinet. The Attorney General'slegal advice or constitutional advice should not be lightly disregarded. The Attorney General's policyadvice has the same weight as that of other ministers.

Criminal prosecutions (s.5 (d))

One of the most publicly scrutinized aspects of the Attorney General's role is the responsibility for criminal prosecutions encompassed in section 5 (d) and s. 92 of the Constitution Act, 1867 . Section 92gives the provinces authority to legislate in matters related to the administration of criminal justice andthereby gives the provincial Attorney General authority to prosecute offences under the Criminal Code.

The Attorney General does not, however, direct or cause charges to be laid. While the AttorneyGeneral and the Attorney General's agents may provide legal advice to the police,

the ultimate decision

whether or not to lay charges is for the police.Once the charge is laid

the decision 

as to whether the prosecution should proceed,and in what manner,

is

for the Attorney General and the Crown Attorney.

7/31/2019 Step on Every Rock Killing Serpents

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/step-on-every-rock-killing-serpents 20/25

It is now an accepted and important constitutional principle that the Attorney General must carry outthe Minister's criminal prosecution responsibilities

independent of Cabinet and of any partisan political pressures. The Attorney General's responsibility for individual criminal prosecutions must be undertaken - andseen to be undertaken - on strictly objective and legal criteria, free of any political considerations.

Whether to initiate or stay a criminal proceeding is not an issue of government policy. This

responsibility has been characterized as a matter of the Attorney General acting as the Queen'sAttorney - not as a Minister of the government of the day.

This is not to suggest that decisions regarding criminal prosecutions are made in a complete vacuum. Awide range of policy considerations may be weighed in executing this responsibility, and the AttorneyGeneral may choose to consult the Cabinet on some of these considerations. However any decisionsrelating to the conduct of individual prosecutions must be the Attorney General's alone andindependent of the traditional Cabinet decision making process. In practice, in the vast majority of cases, these decisions are made by the Attorney General's agents, the Crown Attorneys.

An important part of the Crown's - and thus the Attorney General's - responsibility in conductingcriminal prosecutions is associated with the responsibility to represent the public interest - whichincludes not only the community as a whole and the victim, but also the accused. The Crown has adistinct responsibility to the court to present all the credible evidence available.

The responsibility is to present the case fairly - not necessarily to convict. This is a fundamental precept of criminal law, even if it is not a particularly well-understood concept among the general public. One of the Attorney General's responsibilities in fostering public respect for the rule of law, isto assist the public in understanding the nature and limits of the prosecutorial function.

Ultimately

the Attorney Generalis accountable to the people of the province, 

through the Legislature, for decisions relating to criminal prosecutions. Such accountability can only occur, of course, once the

 prosecution is completed or when a final decision has been made not to prosecute. The sub judicae rule bars any comment on a matter before the courts that is likely to influence the matter. The sub judicae

rule strictly prohibits the Attorney General from commenting on prosecutions that are before thecourts. Given the stature of the Attorney General's position, any public comment coming from the

office would be seen as an attempt to influence the case.

Although the Attorney general can become involved in decision-making in relation to individual

criminal cases, such a practice would leave the Minister vulnerable to accusations of politicalinterference. Accordingly, it is traditional to leave the day-to-day decision-making in the hands of theAttorney General's agents, the Crown Attorneys, except in cases of exceptional importance where the public would expect the Attorney General to be briefed.

Legislative Responsibilities (s. 5(e) and (f))

The Attorney General has broad responsibilities associated with Government legislation. Theseresponsibilities have been described as twofold. One is to oversee that all legislative enactments are in

7/31/2019 Step on Every Rock Killing Serpents

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/step-on-every-rock-killing-serpents 21/25

accordance with principles of natural justice and civil rights (see also s. 5(b) above). This is obviouslyan important and broad area of responsibility. The second aspect of this responsibility is to advise onthe constitutionality and legality of legislation.

The Attorney General's legislative responsibilities are played out in a variety roles. The Office of Legislative Counsel reports to the Attorney General. Legislative Counsel plays a key role in ensuring

the legal integrity of Government legislation. Although the Legislative Counsel's reporting relationshipto the Attorney General does allow the Attorney General to provide guidance and set standards,individual pieces of legislation are drafted on instructions from client ministries and are not within thesole control of Legislative Counsel or the Attorney General. It should also be noted that LegislativeCounsel also has a direct responsibility to the Legislature as the Office also drafts all private member's bills.

The Attorney General has a further role to play as part of whatever Cabinet Committee is formed toreview legislation and regulations. Here the Minister has an opportunity to comment on the technicalissues related to legislation and regulations prior to Cabinet consideration.

The Attorney General's role on legislative matters is as an adviser to the Cabinet. Although unlikely,Cabinet could, in theory, receive the Attorney General's legal opinion on legislation and choose todisregard it. The Attorney General's role is not independent of Cabinet decision making as in the areaof criminal prosecutions. As was noted earlier, the Attorney General must make careful distinctionsabout the legal opinions and policy or political preferences being offered about legislation.

Civil Litigation (s.5(h) and (d))

In addition to the specific responsibilities to conduct civil litigation on behalf of the Government andits agencies (s. 5(h)), the Attorney General has broader litigation responsibilities flowing from thehistorical powers of the Attorney General referred to in s. 5(d) of the Act. These powers are based on

the Crown's parens patriae (parental) authority. The Attorney General's authority, therefore, is not onlyto conduct litigation in cases directly affecting the government or its agencies but also to litigate caseswhere there is a clear matter of public interest or public rights at stake.

This has been characterized as a constitutional responsibility to ensure that the public interest is welland independently represented. It may involve interventions in private litigation or Charter challengesto legislation, even if the arguments conclude that the legislation does contravene constitutionally protected rights.

Responsibility for Court Administration (s. 5(c))

A key component of the Attorney General's responsibilities to ensure the administration of justice inthe province is the administration of the courts and as a result the responsibility for maintaining liaisonwith the judiciary.

Given the fundamental importance of the independence of the judiciary, the responsibility for courtsadministration is often a very sensitive and delicate issue. Great care and respect for the principles of  judicial independence must be exercised in this area.

7/31/2019 Step on Every Rock Killing Serpents

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/step-on-every-rock-killing-serpents 22/25

 The Ministry

• Justice Ontarioo How do I find a lawyer or a paralegal?

o Family Law

o Criminal Law

o Lawsuits & Disputeso Human Rights

o Wills & Estates

o Tickets & Fines

• Court Services• Victims of Crime• Family Justice• Public Guardian & Trustee• Justice on Target

Explore Government

 

Contacts

Follow the Ministry

•

Twitter • RSS

• Facebook 

• Flickr (photo gallery)

• Ministry Podcasts

Contact Us | Help | Accessibility | Privacy Statement | Important Notices 

© Queen's Printer for Ontario, 2008 - 2010

Last Modified: Monday, December 13, 2010

7/31/2019 Step on Every Rock Killing Serpents

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/step-on-every-rock-killing-serpents 23/25

Ultimatelythe Attorney General

is accountable to the people of the province, 

through the Legislature,

However the legislature legislated

RUNSResponsibly Unaccountable Nuances Subversives

Attorney General, guardian of the public interest13. (1) The Attorney General for Ontario shall serve as the guardian of the public interest in all

matters within the scope of this Act or having to do in any way with the practice of law in Ontario or the provision of legal services in Ontario, and for this purpose he or she may at any time require the

 production of any document or thing pertaining to the affairs of the Society. R.S.O. 1990, c. L.8,s. 13 (1); 1998, c. 21, s. 7 (1); 2006, c. 21, Sched. C, s. 13.

Admissions

(2) No admission of any person in any document or thing produced under subsection (1) is admissiblein evidence against that person in any proceedings other than proceedings under this Act. R.S.O. 1990,c. L.8, s. 13 (2); 1998, c. 21, s. 7 (2).

Protection of Minister

(3) No person who is or has been the Attorney General for Ontario is subject to any proceedings of theSociety or to any penalty imposed under this Act for anything done by him or her while exercising the

functions of such office. R.S.O. 1990, c. L.8, s. 13 (3); 1998, c. 21, s. 7 (3).

7/31/2019 Step on Every Rock Killing Serpents

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/step-on-every-rock-killing-serpents 24/25

www.Sataniclaw.com PAGAN COIF

7/31/2019 Step on Every Rock Killing Serpents

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/step-on-every-rock-killing-serpents 25/25

Constitution Act, 1982Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom

Whereas Canada is founded on principles that recognize theSupremacy of God and the Rule of Law

www.POTS2013.comPower of the Spirit

www.cdfji.ca Constitution Diligence Fiduciary Judiciary Independence

www.mcfrauds.comRCMP investigate self finding self Innocent

Since June 30 2005 have turned every rock, now it is time to

Step on every rock killing serpents