Premium
The ethical significance of Michael DiBiase v. City of Vaughan
Author(s) -
MacEwen Philip
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
canadian public administration
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.361
H-Index - 26
eISSN - 1754-7121
pISSN - 0008-4840
DOI - 10.1111/capa.12262
Subject(s) - complaint , ethical code , law , normative , political science , sociology , philosophy , humanities
In academia, ethics is usually divided into three areas: 1) descriptive ethics, 2) prescriptive ethics, and 3) meta‐ethics. This article argues that Michael DiBiase v. City of Vaughan is significant in terms of all three areas of ethics. It is important for the following three reasons. a) It articulates a “statutory scheme” (Part V.1 of the Municipal Act, 2001, the code of conduct of the relevant municipality (Vaughan), and the complaint protocol or rules or any other guidelines or documents for receiving, investigating, and reporting the findings of a complaint to a municipal council) that governs an Integrity Commissioner. b) It confirms that an Integrity Commissioner who exercises the powers conferred upon her and applies the relevant municipal code of conduct and complaint protocol in a manner which passes the test of reasonableness is acting rightfully when she interprets and reformulates complaints submitted by the public. c) It clarifies what it means to be an “Integrity Commissioner” by specifying the purpose, role, and function of those who hold this position.