Programmer Faces Terror Charge:

[Pete Chown]

David Hansen wrote:

> Is there not a trickle of cases where someone has tried to bring a 
> case against a defendant, only to have these jokers "take it over" 
> with the intention, subsequently carried out, of giving up on the 
> case.

This is true, but it was Parliament's intention that they be given both 
the power to stop cases and the power to take them over.  It wasn't that 
the A-G and DPP were given the power to take cases over, and they 
subsequently misused this power to stop cases that they disagreed with.

If there was no power to take cases over, there would be a problem with 
double jeopardy.  Someone could arrange to be prosecuted by a friend, 
who would then deliberately withhold evidence from the jury.  The 
unavoidable acquittal would make it impossible for the CPS to bring a 
case subsequently.  (Alternatively, if the rule didn't work this way, it 
would allow someone to be prosecuted over and over again by different 
people, which would be just as bad.)

Also, I think the power is there to protect defendants.  A vexatious 
civil case would be annoying enough, but a vexatious criminal case could 
get you a substantial prison sentence if you lose.

-- 
Pete