DOCSLIB.ORG

Ethics Resource Materials

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Ethics Resource Materials Global Forum on Fighting Corruption Safeguarding Integrity Among Justice and Security Officials February 24-26, 1999, Washington, D.C. ETHICS RESOURCE MATERIALS Codes, Statutes and Financial Disclosure Forms Compiled by the U.S. Office of Government Ethics and the U.S. Department of State, in cooperation with the National Democratic Institute (NDI), American Bar Association Central and Eastern European Law Initiative (ABA/CEELI), Casals and Associates and the governments of Argentina, Canada, Germany, Nepal, the Philippines, South Africa and the United Kingdom. Crown copyright is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office and the Cabinet Office. Tab Argentina Codigo de Etica de la Funcion Publica A An ethics code for executive branch employees Barbados B Code of Ethics for Royal Barbados Police Force Canada Conflict of Interest and Post-Employment Code C for Public Office Holders An ethics code administered by the Office of the Ethics Counselor Excerpts from the German Criminal Code D Statutes regarding corruption of public officials Prevention of Corruption E A directive applicable to federal public servants Georgia Special Anti-Corruption Service (Draft) F Statute for law enforcement agency Hungary Code of Ethics of Public Officials G An ethics code applicable to public officials Nepal Code of Conduct for Civil Servants (Draft) H An ethics code for civil servants Panama Ethical Principles for Public Servants I An executive decree for public servants Sworn Statement Of Assets, Liabilities, and J Networth; Disclosure Of Business Interests and Financial Connections and Identification of Relatives in the Government Service Financial disclosure form Philippines Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public K Officials and Employees A code of ethics established by executive order Puerto Rico Government Ethics Law And Amendments L Code of ethics for public officials Informe Financier0 M Financial disclosure form for public servants South Africa Register of Members' Interests N Financial disclosure for members of parliament Code of Conduct in Regard to Financial Interests 0 Code of conduct for members of parliament Tanzania Public Leadership Code of Ethics P Ethics code for designated public leaders United Kingdom Ministerial Code Q Code of conduct for cabinet ministers Code of Conduct for Members of Parliament R Ethics guidelines for legislators TAB A Presidencia de la Nacibn Argentina Oficina National de Etica Pciblica CODIGO DE ETICA DE LA FUNCION PUBLICA i OFICINA NACIONAL DE ETICA PUBLICA l . .._ ,.,_,_ _.....,_ _-__ .__,______.____ _,__- _ ._. _- _,.-.._._.. _. ..-.--..- Presidencia de la Nacih Director Prof. Dr. Luis Nicolh Ferreira Balcarce 50 Tel/Fax: 344-3720 E-mail: [email protected] Subdirectora Dra. Amalia Mattio de Mascias Belgrano 748 Of. 73 Tel: 331-8487/88 E-mail: [email protected] CONSEJO A~ES~RDEETICAPUBLICA Dr. ALCHOURON, Guillermo Presidente de Origenes AFJP. Vicepresidente de la Cknara de Administradoras de Fondos de Jubilacibn y Pensih. (CAFJP) Ex-Presidente de la Sociedad Rural Argentina. Dr. ALTERINI, Jorge Horatio Presidente de la C&ma.ra National de Apelaciones en lo Civil de la Capital Federal. Vicepresidente de la Asociaci6n de Magi&ados de la Capital Federal. Profesor Titular Regular de la Universidad de Buenos Aires, Universidad Cat6lica Argentina y Universidad National de La Plata. Dr. AMEAL, Oscar Vicepresidente de1 Colegio Pliblico de Abogados de la Capital Federal. Profesor Titular Regular de la Universidad de Buenos Aires, Universidad Cat6lica Argentina, Universidad de1 Museo Social, Universidad de Belgrano. Miembro de1 Consejo de la Magistratura. Sr. BAEZ, Jo& Genaro Ex-Secretario de Gremiales e Interior de la Confederacih General de1 Trabajo de la Reptiblica Argentina. Ex-Secretario General de1 Sindicato de1 Seguro de la Reptiblica Argentina. Lit. BARYLKO, Jaime Decano de la Facultad de Humanidades de la Universidad Maimhides. BERAJA, Ruben Presidente de la Delegacih de Asociaciones Ssraelitas Argentinas. Sr. CROTTO, Enrique Presidente de la Sociedad Rural Argentina. Sra. EKMEKDJLAN de SARATSIAN, Maria Presidente de Incise - Intercambio Civico Social. Dr. GARROTE, Angel Femin Presidente de la Federation de Colegios de Abogados de la Republica Argentina. (F.A.C.A) Miembro de1 Consejo de la Magistratura. Sr. JAROSLAVSKY, Natin C&u- Diputado National M/C. 9-a. KRIEGER VASENA de CHOPITEA, Daisy F’residente de COAS - Cooperadora de Action Social. Vicepresidente de1 Foro de1 Sector Social. Prof. LAIRJO, Felix Hip6lito Presidente de la Academia National de Pehdismo. Dr. LOPEZ CABANA, Roberto Manuel Acadimico de Numero de la Academia Interamericana de Derecho IntemacionaI y Comparado. I%fesor Titular Regular de la Universidad de Buenos Aires, Universidad Catolica Argentina, Universidad de Belgrano, Universidad Notarial Argentina, Unkersidad Catolica de Santiago de1 Estero. hf. MACCAGNO, Amando Presidente Academia National de Medicina Decano de1 Cuerpo Medico Forense. Ratho MARABI, Marcos Centro Comunitario Shalom. Emb. ORTIZ de ROZAS, Carlos Presidente de la Fundacih Bunge y Born. Ex-embajador de la Reptiblica Argentina ante Egipto, Bulgaria, O.N.U., Gran Bretia, Italia, Francis y Estados Unidos. Dr. PAZ, Hipblito Ex-Mini&o de Relaciones Exteriores. Ex-Embajador de la Reptiblica Argentina en Estados Unidos, Grecia y Portugal. Dr. ROBLEDO, Angel Federico Presidente de la Comish NacionaI de Politicas y Estrategias de la Democracia. Ex-Ministro de Defensa National, de Relaciones Exteriores y Cult0 y de1 Interior. Ex-embajador de la Reptiblica Argentina ante Ecuador, Mixico y Brasil. Sra. RUEDA de URANGA, Silvia Presidente de la Asociacih Conciencia. Dr. SAVINO, Luis Maria Presidente de la Fundacih de Estudios Americanos. Sr. SEBASTIANI, Claudio Presidente de la Uni6n Industrial Argentina. Sra. SEGURA de MARTINI, Maria Rosa Presidente de1 Foro de1 Sector Social. 1 PARTE GENERAL CAPITULO I FIN DE LA FUNCION PUBLlCA ARTICULO lo.- BIEN COMUN. El fin de la fimcion publica es el bien comun, ordenado por las disposiciones de la Constitucibn National, 10s tratados intemacionales ratificados por la Nation y Ias normas destinadas a su regulation. El fkcionario publico tiene el deber primario de leahad con su pais a traves de las instituciones democraticas de gobiemo, con prioridad a sus vinculaciones con personas, partidos politicos o instituciones de cualquier naturaleza. CAPITULO II DEFINICIONES Y ALCANCES ARTICULO 2O.- FUNCION PUBLICA A 10s efectos de1 presente Codigo, se entiende por “fkcion publica” toda actividad temporal o permanente, remunerada u honoraria, realizada por una persona humana en nombre de1 Estado o al servicio de1 Estado o de sus entidades, en cualquiera de sus niveles jerarquicos. ARTICULO 3’.- FUNCIONARIO PUBLICO. A 10s efectos de1 presente C&ligo, se entiende por ‘Smcionario publico” cualquier fimcionario o empleado de1 Estado o de sus entidades, incluidos 10s que han sido seleccionados, designados o electos para desempem actividades o fimciones en nombre de1 Estado o al servicio de1 Estado, en todos sus niveles jer&rquicos. A taks efectos, 10s t&m&s O@kti?mN&d Lki%zz 96 “fimcionario”, “servidor”, “agente”, “oficial” o “empkado” se consideran sinonimos. ARTICULO 4”.- AMBITO DE APLICACION. Este Codigo rige para 10s fincionarios pliblicos de todos 10s organismos de la Administration Publica National, centralizada y descentralizada en cualquiera de sus formas, entidades autarquicas, empresas y sociedades de1 Estado y sociedades con participation estatal mayoritaria, sociedades de economia mixta, Fuerzas Armadas y de Seguridad, instituciones de la seguridad social de1 sector publico, bancos y entidades financieras oficiales y de todo otro ente en que el Estado National o sus entes descentralizados tengan participation total o mayoritaria de capital o en la formation de las decisiones societarias, asi coma tambien de las comisiones nacionales y 10s entes de regulation de servicios publicos. ARTICULO So.- INTERPRETACION. La Oficina National de Etica Publica es el organ0 facultado para dictar las normas interpretativas y aclaratorias de1 presente Codigo. Los dictknenes e instrucciones escritas emitidos por la Oficina National de Etica Publica son obligatorios para quienes 10s hubieran requerido o fueran sus destinatarios. El fkncionario que ajuste su conducta a tales dictknenes o instrucciones queda exento de responsabilidad Utica y de sancion administrativo-disciplinaria, salvo 10s cases en que hubiera violation evidente de la ley. ARTICULO 6’.- COMPROMISO. El ingreso a la fimcion publica implica tomar conocimiento de1 presente Codigo y asumir el compromise de su debido cumplimiento. ARTICULO 70.- CONSULTAS. En aquellos cases en 10s cuales objetiva y razonablemente se genere una situacih de incertidumbre con relacih a una cuestih concreta de naturaleza &ica, el fhcionario pliblico debe consultar a la Oficina National de Etica fibha. CAPITULO III PRINCIPIOS GENERALES ARTICULO go.- PROBIDAD. El fimcionario pliblico debe actuar con rectitud y honradez, procurando satisfacer el inter& general y desechando todo provecho o ventaja personal, obtenido por si o por interposita persona. Tambien estd obligado a exterior-k una conducta honesta. ARTICULO 90.- PRUDENCIA. El fbncionario publico debe actuar con pleno conocimiento de las materias sometidas a su consideration, con la r&ma diigencia que un buen administrador emplearia para con sus propios bienes. El ejercicio de la fiurcion publica debe inspirar confianza en la comunidad. Asimismo,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Constitutional Role of the Privy Council and the Prerogative 3
    Foreword The Privy Council is shrouded in mystery. As Patrick O’Connor points out, even its statutory definition is circular: the Privy Council is defined by the Interpretation Act 1978 as the members of ‘Her Majesty’s Honourable Privy Council’. Many people may have heard of its judicial committee, but its other roles emerge from the constitutional fog only occasionally – at their most controversial, to dispossess the Chagos Islanders of their home, more routinely to grant a charter to a university. Tracing its origin back to the twelfth or thirteen century, its continued existence, if considered at all, is regarded as vaguely charming and largely formal. But, as the vehicle that dispossessed those living on or near Diego Garcia, the Privy Council can still display the power that once it had more widely as an instrument of feudal rule. Many of its Orders in Council bypass Parliament but have the same force as democratically passed legislation. They are passed, unlike such legislation, without any express statement of compatibility with the European Convention on Human Rights. What is more, Orders in Council are not even published simultaneously with their passage. Two important orders relating to the treatment of the Chagos Islanders were made public only five days after they were passed. Patrick, originally inspired by his discovery of the essay that the great nineteenth century jurist Albert Venn Dicey wrote for his All Souls Fellowship, provides a fascinating account of the history and continuing role of the Privy Council. He concludes by arguing that its role, and indeed continued existence, should be subject to fundamental review.
    [Show full text]
  • Page 1 Halsbury's Laws of England (3) RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE
    Page 1 Halsbury's Laws of England (3) RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE CROWN AND THE JUDICIARY 133. The monarch as the source of justice. The constitutional status of the judiciary is underpinned by its origins in the royal prerogative and its legal relationship with the Crown, dating from the medieval period when the prerogatives were exercised by the monarch personally. By virtue of the prerogative the monarch is the source and fountain of justice, and all jurisdiction is derived from her1. Hence, in legal contemplation, the Sovereign's Majesty is deemed always to be present in court2 and, by the terms of the coronation oath and by the maxims of the common law, as also by the ancient charters and statutes confirming the liberties of the subject, the monarch is bound to cause law and justice in mercy to be administered in all judgments3. This is, however, now a purely impersonal conception, for the monarch cannot personally execute any office relating to the administration of justice4 nor effect an arrest5. 1 Bac Abr, Prerogative, D1: see COURTS AND TRIBUNALS VOL 24 (2010) PARA 609. 2 1 Bl Com (14th Edn) 269. 3 As to the duty to cause law and justice to be executed see PARA 36 head (2). 4 2 Co Inst 187; 4 Co Inst 71; Prohibitions del Roy (1607) 12 Co Rep 63. James I is said to have endeavoured to revive the ancient practice of sitting in court, but was informed by the judges that he could not deliver an opinion: Prohibitions del Roy (1607) 12 Co Rep 63; see 3 Stephen's Commentaries (4th Edn) 357n.
    [Show full text]
  • British Reaction to the Sepoy Mutiny, 1857-1858 Approved
    BRITISH REACTION TO THE SEPOY MUTINY, 1857-1858 APPROVED: Major /Professor mor Frotessar of History Dean' ot the GraduatGradua' e ScHooT* BRITISH REACTION TO THE SEPOY MUTINY, 1857-185S THESIS Presented to the Graduate Council of the North Texas State University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS By Samuel Shafeeq Denton, Texas August, 1970 PREFACE English and Indian historians have devoted considerable research and analysis to the genesis of the Sepoy Mutiny of 1857 but have ignored contemporary British reaction to it, a neglect which this study attempts to satisfy. After the initial, spontaneous, condemnation of Sepoy atrocities, Queen Victoria, her Parliament, and subjects took a more rational and constructive attitude toward the insurrection in India, which stemmed primarily from British interference in Indian religious and social customs, symbolized by the cartridge issue. Englishmen demanded reform, and Parliament-- at once anxious to please the electorate and to preserve the valuable colony of India--complied within a year, although the Commons defeated the first two Indian bills, because of the interposition of other foreign and domestic problems. But John Bright, Lord Edward Stanley, William Gladstone, Benjamin Disraeli, and their friends joined forces to pass the third Indian bill, which became law on August 2, 1858. For this study, the most useful primary sources are Parliamentary Debates. Journals of the House of Commons and Lords, British and Foreign State' Papers, English Historical Queen Victoria's Letters , and the Annual' Re'g'i'st'er. Of the few secondary works which focus on British reac- tion to the Sepoy Mutiny, Anthony Wood's Nineteenth Centirr/ Britain, 1815-1914 gives a good account of British politics after the Mutiny.
    [Show full text]
  • What the Crown May Do
    WHAT THE CROWN MAY DO 1. It is now established, at least at the level of the Court of Appeal (so that Court has recently stated)1, that, absent some prohibition, a Government minister may do anything which any individual may do. The purpose of this paper is to explain why this rule is misconceived and why it, and the conception of the “prerogative” which it necessarily assumes, should be rejected as a matter of constitutional law. 2. The suggested rule raises two substantive issues of constitutional law: (i) who ought to decide in what new activities the executive may engage, in what circumstances and under what conditions; and (ii) what is the scope for abuse that such a rule may create and should it be left without legal control. 3. As Sir William Wade once pointed out (in a passage subsequently approved by the Appellate Committee2), “The powers of public authorities are...essentially different from those of private persons. A man making his will may, subject to any rights of his dependants, dispose of his property just as he may wish. He may act out of malice or a spirit of revenge, but in law this does not affect his exercise of power. In the same way a private person has an absolute power to release a debtor, or, where the law permits, to evict a tenant, regardless of his motives. This is unfettered discretion.” If a minister may do anything that an individual may do, he may pursue any purpose which an individual may do when engaged in such activities.
    [Show full text]
  • Treaty-Making and the British Parliament -Europe
    Chicago-Kent Law Review Volume 67 Issue 2 Symposium on Parliamentary Participation in the Making and Operation of Article 9 Treaties June 1991 Treaty-Making and the British Parliament -Europe Chicago-Kent Law Review Templeman The Right Honourable The Lord Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.kentlaw.iit.edu/cklawreview Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Chicago-Kent Law Review Templeman The Right Honourable The Lord, Treaty-Making and the British Parliament -Europe, 67 Chi.-Kent L. Rev. 459 (1991). Available at: https://scholarship.kentlaw.iit.edu/cklawreview/vol67/iss2/9 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarly Commons @ IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Chicago-Kent Law Review by an authorized editor of Scholarly Commons @ IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. TREATY-MAKING AND THE BRITISH PARLIAMENT THE RIGHT HONOURABLE THE LORD TEMPLEMAN* I. INTRODUCTION Under English law the capacity to negotiate and conclude treaties falls entirely to the executive arm of government. Nominally Parliament plays no role at all in this process. This paper will explain the British system, the different functions of the executive and legislature, the pro- cess of concluding and implementing treaties, and finally the role played by the courts in upholding this system. An understanding of how trea- ties are entered into and implemented in British law depends on an ap- preciation of the division between the international aspects of treaty- making and the domestic aspects of implementation.
    [Show full text]
  • The Cabinet Manual
    The Cabinet Manual A guide to laws, conventions and rules on the operation of government 1st edition October 2011 The Cabinet Manual A guide to laws, conventions and rules on the operation of government 1st edition October 2011 Foreword by the Prime Minister On entering government I set out, Cabinet has endorsed the Cabinet Manual as an authoritative guide for ministers and officials, with the Deputy Prime Minister, our and I expect everyone working in government to shared desire for a political system be mindful of the guidance it contains. that is looked at with admiration This country has a rich constitution developed around the world and is more through history and practice, and the Cabinet transparent and accountable. Manual is invaluable in recording this and in ensuring that the workings of government are The Cabinet Manual sets out the internal rules far more open and accountable. and procedures under which the Government operates. For the first time the conventions determining how the Government operates are transparently set out in one place. Codifying and publishing these sheds welcome light on how the Government interacts with the other parts of our democratic system. We are currently in the first coalition Government David Cameron for over 60 years. The manual sets out the laws, Prime Minister conventions and rules that do not change from one administration to the next but also how the current coalition Government operates and recent changes to legislation such as the establishment of fixed-term Parliaments. The content of the Cabinet Manual is not party political – it is a record of fact, and I welcome the role that the previous government, select committees and constitutional experts have played in developing it in draft to final publication.
    [Show full text]
  • Legislative Consent Memorandum Trade
    LEGISLATIVE CONSENT MEMORANDUM TRADE (DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION) BILL Introduction 1. The Trade (Disclosure of Information) Bill (the Bill) was introduced in the House of Commons on 15 December 2020. As the Bill is a relevant Bill under Rule 9B.1 of the Parliament’s Standing Orders, this memorandum has been lodged by Fiona Hyslop MSP, Cabinet Secretary for Economy, Fair Work and Culture, and supported by Ivan McKee MSP, Minister for Trade, Investment and Innovation in accordance with Rule 9B.3.1(a). The Bill and its supporting documents can be found at Trade (Disclosure of Information) Bill 2019-21 — UK Parliament. This memorandum relates to the Bill as introduced. 2. The Bill is necessary to ensure that powers are in place to allow the UK Government to ensure flow and manage any border friction arising at the end of the Transition Period. The powers in this Bill largely replicate the powers in the Trade Bill to which the Scottish Parliament consented on 8 October 2020: as that Bill will not receive Royal Assent by 31 December, standalone legislation is required. Content of the Bill 3. The UK Government has set out the aims and purpose of the proposed legislation in the Explanatory Notes which accompany the Bill. The UK Government describes the principal purpose of the Bill as providing key data sharing measures that are required as the UK Government prepares for its new relationship with the European Union (paragraph 1 of the Explanatory Notes). The main provisions of the Bill are as follows: Clause 1 • Creating a power for HMRC to collect information on the number and identity of exporters of goods and services in the UK and share this with public and private bodies (including the devolved administrations) so that they can fulfil their public functions relating to trade.
    [Show full text]
  • Judicial Review of Ministerial Advice to the Crown
    33 Judicial Review of Ministerial Advice to the Crown Mark D Walters* For Thomas Hobbes, nothing illustrated the The orthodox view is that the Crown or its “inconstant use of words” better than the confu- representative in Canada must exercise its legal sion between “Counsels and Commands,” for the powers only upon the advice of ministers who words “Doe this,” he said, “are the words not only are responsible to the elected members of Parlia- of him that Commandeth; but also of him that ment, and that this rule is one of constitutional giveth Counsell.”1 This confusion remains with convention, not law.4 Rules of constitutional con- us today. We still do not have a sound grasp of vention are, in the orthodox view, customary rules the distinctive place that counsel or advice plays of constitutional practice or morality enforced within our constitutional system. How is minis- politically, whereas rules of constitutional law terial advice to the sovereign concerning how a are true laws enforced by courts.5 Applying these power ought to be exercised different from the ideas, the government argued that Alani’s case exercise of the power itself? Does ministerial had to fail: the Prime Minister’s “advisory role” in advice exist within a domain of political action Senate appointments “exists only by virtue of the beyond the reach of law? These are persistent constitutional convention” and so it cannot be a questions in Canada. concern for judges.6 Prime ministerial advice to the Crown is, in other words, sealed off from law. Was this argument sound? Does constitutional Consider Aniz Alani’s challenge to the deci- convention allow executive power asserted in the sion made in 2014 by (then) Prime Minister form of advice or counsel to reign within a “legal Stephen Harper to stop filling Senate vacancies black hole”?7 Although the case was dismissed — or, to speak more accurately, the decision to for mootness, the substance of the arguments it refuse to advise the Governor General of Canada raised are worth considering.
    [Show full text]
  • Queen's Or Prince's Consent
    QUEEN’S OR PRINCE’S CONSENT This pamphlet is intended for members of the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel. Unless otherwise stated: • references to Erskine May are to the 24th edition (2011), • references to the Companion to the Standing Orders are to the Companion to the Standing Orders and Guide to Proceedings of the House of Lords (25th edition, 2017), • references to the Cabinet Office Guide to Making Legislation are to the version of July 2017. Office of the Parliamentary Counsel September 2018 CONTENTS CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION CHAPTER 2 QUEEN’S CONSENT Introduction. 2 The prerogative. 2 Hereditary revenues, the Duchies and personal property and interests . 4 Exceptions and examples . 6 CHAPTER 3 PRINCE’S CONSENT Introduction. 7 The Duchy of Cornwall . 7 The Prince and Steward of Scotland . 8 Prince’s consent in other circumstances . 8 Exceptions and examples . 8 CHAPTER 4 GENERAL EXCEPTIONS The remoteness/de minimis tests . 10 Original consent sufficient for later provisions . 10 No adverse effect on the Crown. 11 CHAPTER 5 THE SIGNIFICATION OF CONSENT Signification following amendments to a bill. 13 Re-signification for identical bill . 14 The manner of signification . 14 The form of signification . 15 CHAPTER 6 PRACTICAL STEPS Obtaining consent. 17 Informing the Whips . 17 Writing to the House authorities . 17 Private Members’ Bills. 17 Informing the Palace of further developments . 18 Other. 18 CHAPTER 7 MISCELLANEOUS Draft bills . 19 Consent not obtained . 19 Inadvertent failure to signify consent . 19 Consent in the absence of the Queen. 20 Consent before introduction of a bill . 20 Queen’s speech . 20 Royal Assent .
    [Show full text]
  • Canadian Monarchist News Les Nouvelles Monarchiques Du Canada Summer/Été 2019 — No
    Canadian Monarchist News Les Nouvelles Monarchiques du Canada Summer/Été 2019 — No. 46 An occasional Newsletter for members and friends of The Monarchist League of Canada The Monarchist League of Canada / La Ligue Monarchiste du Canada, PO Box 1057, Lakeshore West PO, Oakville, Ontario, Canada L6K 0B2 905-855-7262 (800) 465-6925 www.monarchist.ca THE MONARCHIST LEAGUE OF CANADA – 49th ANNIVERSARY 1970-2019 Monarchist League sole supplier of Colour Lithos of Queen FEDS END QUEEN PICTURE DISTRIBUTION, SUBSTITUTING DOWNLOADS Report & Commentary this way, the visible presence of our by Robert Finch, Mon arch, and so the reflection of Dominion Chairman, the our constitutional reality, have be- Monarchist League of Canada come deeply imprinted on the con- sciousness of our citizenry. For many years, the Government The eve of producing a new “of fi - of Can ada, via the Department of cial” photo portrait of The Queen – Canadian Heritage, and its predeces- the current one dates from 2010, and sor, the Department of Secretary of was taken for the Diamond Jubilee State, has made lithographs – colour celebrations here in 2012 – found photographs printed on coat ed stock Can adian Heritage discontinue its – available without charge to Cana- long standing distribution. In its task dians. Regularly updated to reflect of promoting our heritage, which the inevitable processes of time, these one might have thought was at once constitute the great majority of images a privilege and duty in our Realm – of our Sov ereign which you and I and, citing cost and environmental are accustomed to see in fire halls considerations, the Department told and police stations, municipal council Canadians they would henceforth chambers and Legion halls, our em- need to access its website from which bassies abroad and ports of entry to they could download and then print Canada, not to men tion many other for themselves the picture of The public places and in homes and uni- Queen.
    [Show full text]
  • FCC/20/CONT/S5/07 1 Submission from Faculty Of
    FCC/20/CONT/S5/07 Submission from Faculty of Advocates UK Withdrawal from The European Union (Continuity) (Scotland) Bill Q.1 What are the implications of the keeping pace power in the Bill potentially leading to substantial policy divergence with the rest of the UK following the end of the transitional period? It is clear that use of such a keeping pace power may contribute to policy divergence from the rest of the UK. For the purposes of our response, we consider the legal implications of such a power and of such potential divergence. Those legal implications will depend, at least in part, upon the outcome of the continuing negotiations among the four nations of the UK with respect to common frameworks. In terms of §4 of Schedule 3 to the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018, the Cabinet Office publishes regular reports to Parliament on the progress made in the development of common frameworks under the principles agreed between the UK Government and Scottish and Welsh Governments at the Joint Ministerial Committee (European Negotiations) in October 2017. The latest such report was published in May 2020, reporting on progress up to 25 March 2020. These negotiations are of vital importance. As explained by the Supreme Court in Regina (Miller and another) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union [2018] AC 61 at §130, the repeal of the European Communities Act 1972 will, if no new legislative constraints are introduced, result in a major increase in the powers of devolved authorities such as the Scottish Parliament and Scottish Government.
    [Show full text]
  • Recent Developments in the Constitutional and International Status of the British Dominions C.D
    University of Minnesota Law School Scholarship Repository Minnesota Law Review 1926 Recent Developments in the Constitutional and International Status of the British Dominions C.D. Allin Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/mlr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Allin, C.D., "Recent Developments in the Constitutional and International Status of the British Dominions" (1926). Minnesota Law Review. 921. https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/mlr/921 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the University of Minnesota Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in Minnesota Law Review collection by an authorized administrator of the Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. MINNESOTA LAW REVIEW RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN THE CONSTITUTIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL STATUS OF THE BRITISH DOMINIONSt By C. D. ALLIN* T HE British Dominions were keenly disappointed at the failure of the United States Senate to consent to the ratifi- cation of the Covenant of the League. They had expected that the United States would take the lead in welcoming them into the new association of states, but instead of that they were greatly surprised to find that the special recognition of their interna- tional status by the League was subjected to special criticism in the Senate and undoubtedly constituted one of the principal rea- sons for the rejection of the Covenant. The effect of this defeat was not only to weaken the power and prestige of the League. but also to repudiate the tentative recognition which had been accorded to them by President Wilson at the Peace Conference.1 The interesting situation was therefore presented that the Domin- ions had acquired an international status so far as the League and its members were concerned but that they still retained their old colonial status in the eyes of the United States.
    [Show full text]