z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Distinguishing Charter Rights in Criminal and Regulatory Investigations: What’s the Purpose of Analyzing Purpose?
Author(s) -
Christopher Sherrin
Publication year - 2010
Publication title -
alberta law review
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 1925-8356
pISSN - 0002-4821
DOI - 10.29173/alr165
Subject(s) - relevance (law) , charter , law , political science , self incrimination , criminal law , criminal procedure , compliance (psychology) , law and economics , criminal investigation , interrogation , business , privilege (computing) , sociology , psychology , social psychology
This article critically evaluates one of the main justifications for affording persons accused of regulatory offences constitutional protections different from those afforded to persons accused of criminal offences. It is only the latter who enjoy robust constitutional protection against self-incrimination and to privacy. This difference has been justified on the basis that there are different purposes behind regulatory and criminal investigations. The former are supposedly intended to ensure compliance with the law whereas the latter are supposedly intended to gather evidence for prosecution. This article challenges the validity of the justification based on purpose. The author suggests that focusing on investigatory purpose has no relevance to the interests protected by the right to privacy, offers no real protection against the admission of unreliable evidence, and undermines the very principle it is said to protect: the principle against self-incrimination. Moreover, the justification based on purpose misunderstands the purposes of both regulatory and criminal investigations and ignores the reality that in many instances they share the same purpose.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here