Executive Accountability and the APEC Inquiry: Comment on Ruling on Applications to Call Additional Government Witnesses
University of British Columbia Law Review, Vol. 34, pp. 335-344, 2000
Posted: 27 Jan 2011 Last revised: 8 Nov 2013
Date Written: 2000
Abstract
On 25 February 2000 one of the more important Canadian constitutional rulings of recent times was delivered by a distinguished jurist sitting in Vancouver, British Columbia. The decision of retired Justice E.N. (Ted) Hughes was delivered not in his former capacity as a superior court judge, but as Chair of a tribunal that is normally rather quiet and unassuming.
As Commissioner for the R.C.M.P. Public Complaints Commission (P.C.C.), Mr. Hugh has confronted matters of unusual public importance. The tribunal he chairs has found itself dealing with the very issues that have defined constitutionalism over the centuries: the rule of law, the accountability of the executive branch of government, and the adequacy of the complex system of checks and balances that are supposed to keep the Leviathan of state on a constitutional course. Such matters lie barely below the surface of Mr. Hughes’ inquiry. His "Ruling on Applications to Call Additional Government Witnesses" forms and important part of Canada’s constitutional texture.
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation