header-logo header-logo

Crystal Clear?

26 February 2009 / Neil Parpworth
Issue: 7358 / Categories: Features , Public , Human rights , Freedom of Information
printer mail-detail

Should public bodies make known the reasons behind their decisions? Asks Neil Parpworth

Decisions made by public bodies very often have important and sometimes far-reaching consequences for those who are directly affected by them. In order for there to be public confidence in the decision making process, and for a decision maker to be held publicly accountable for the decisions it reaches, it is desirable that the process should be as transparent as the subject matter of the decision permits.

 

Transparency

A key feature of a transparent process is that decisions are accompanied by reasons. Where this is the case, the person affected by the decision is in a better position to appreciate on what basis the decision has been made. If, for example, the decision in question relates to a refusal to grant an applicant a licence to carry out some particular activity, explaining why the applicant was unsuccessful on this occasion may help the applicant to address the relevant issue or issues so that a future application for

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
back-to-top-scroll