Public Interest in Criminal Prosecution in the Modern Era

Reviews / Votes

This book offers an important comparative account of one of the most elusive yet essential concepts underpinning criminal prosecution: public interest. With precision and depth, it explores how public interest shapes prosecutorial discretion across diverse jurisdictions, from Scotland's broad gatekeeping powers to Tuerkiye's tightly regulated framework, and from England and Wales to China, North Macedonia, Ukraine and beyond. The breadth of coverage, combined with the thoughtful normative reflections woven throughout, results in a collection that brings clarity and coherence to an often overlooked area of criminal law. In particular, the volume provides critical insights into how public interest functions at the core of prosecutorial decision-making choices, balancing fairness and efficiency, and shaping the legitimacy of prosecution itself. This is an indispensable work for criminal law and justice scholars, practitioners, and anyone seeking to understand the powerful role public interest plays in shaping criminal justice systems worldwide. * Louise Kennefick, Senior Lecturer in Criminal Law at the University of Glasgow, SCT * Public interest is a concept that permeates multiple dimensions of law-most prominently criminal law-yet remains deeply contested and context-dependent. This important volume brings together leading scholars from a wide range of legal traditions to examine how public interest is understood and operationalised in prosecutorial decision-making across jurisdictions. Its comparative scope and critical insights make it a valuable resource for anyone interested in the evolving role of prosecutors and the normative frameworks that underpin criminal justice. * Micheal O Floinn, Senior Lecturer in Criminal Law at the University of Glasgow, SCT * This book is a valuable contribution to the literature on the limits of prosecutorial discretion. The sheer breadth of different jurisdictions surveyed in the text gives the reader a wide-ranging analysis of different approaches to limiting prosecutorial power, all by reference to some conception of the public interest. The result is a highly engaging and informative piece of scholarship which will be a great resource for anyone interested in prosecutors and the public interest. * Jackson L. Allen, Lecturer in Law, University of Sheffield, UK * While much attention tends to be paid to the analysis of judgments from superior courts and the interpretation of law, often the most influential decision-making in the criminal justice system occurs in the shadows of the law, pre-trial, made by both public prosecutors and those tasked with representing accused persons. Much of my own research has focused on such decision-making and the impact it has on an accused person in particular.
I first met Rahime when she visited the University of Glasgow between 2023 and 2024. It became clear that many of our research interests aligned. Her contribution to, and enthusiasm for, the criminal law community which exists across Scottish universities is evidenced by the inclusion of more than one of the members of that community within the collection.
Rahime has long-standing expertise in criminal law and criminal procedure and has researched areas relating to victim participation, pre-trial procedures and the prosecution of cases involving violence against women. As such, she is especially well-placed to bring together this collection.
The concept of public interest lies at the heart of criminal justice and prosecutorial decision-making but is rarely subject to intellectual interrogation. Instead, it is often taken for granted that the term enjoys shared understanding. Resultantly, critical examination of this fundamental principle is welcome. This collection offers a comprehensive consideration of what is meant by public interest by looking at its manifestation across a number of criminal justice contexts. The collection makes an important contribution to existing literature concerned with the prosecution of crime and decision-making by legal professionals.
Although each jurisdiction has unique procedures and guidance related to how prosecutors enact their role, common themes emerge from the work included in this collection: the transparency (or lack thereof) of decision-making; the right to appeal prosecutors' decisions; alternatives to prosecutions, especially in the context of violence against women; public understanding of legal terminology and decision-making; state power and authority; if and how social norms are reflected in legal decision-making.
This collection should be of interest to those concerned with criminal law and criminal justice, speaking as it does to an integral concept. The comparative approach invites cross-cultural awareness whilst also drawing out common themes across multiple jurisdictions by examining understandings and practical enactments of public interest as a concept. The result is a body of work which encourages deeper reflection on a key concept of justice. * Rachel McPherson, Senior Lecturer in Criminal Law, University of Glasgow, SCT *