Hlutverk Alþingis í réttarfari ráðherraábyrgðarmála

In this article the procedural role of the Icelandic Parliament in ministerial impeachment cases is analysed in view of the historical lineage of the current system and the experience of the first such case against the former prime minister Geir H. Haarde. The focus of analysis is on three complaint...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Karlsson, Haukur Logi
Other Authors: Lagadeild
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:Icelandic
Published: 2023
Subjects:
Online Access:https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11815/4469
id ftopinvisindi:oai:opinvisindi.is:20.500.11815/4469
record_format openpolar
spelling ftopinvisindi:oai:opinvisindi.is:20.500.11815/4469 2023-11-12T04:19:19+01:00 Hlutverk Alþingis í réttarfari ráðherraábyrgðarmála The Icelandic Parliament’s procedural role in ministerial impeachment Karlsson, Haukur Logi Lagadeild 2023-05 54 643439 111–165 https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11815/4469 is ice Tímarit lögfræðinga.; 73(1) Karlsson , H L 2023 , ' Hlutverk Alþingis í réttarfari ráðherraábyrgðarmála ' , Tímarit lögfræðinga. , bind. 73 , nr. 1 , bls. 111–165 . 0493-2714 133254001 8f2e8c10-8e26-4304-99c4-dc729b4c1b5f https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11815/4469 info:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess Ministerial accountability Court of Impeachment Constitutional law Procedural law Lögfræði SDG 16 - Friður og réttlæti /dk/atira/pure/researchoutput/researchoutputtypes/contributiontojournal/article 2023 ftopinvisindi https://doi.org/20.500.11815/4469 2023-11-01T23:55:29Z In this article the procedural role of the Icelandic Parliament in ministerial impeachment cases is analysed in view of the historical lineage of the current system and the experience of the first such case against the former prime minister Geir H. Haarde. The focus of analysis is on three complaints about the current procedural role of the Icelandic Parliament, and these assessed based on theories of social institutions that are tasked with making adjudicative decisions. It is revealed that the procedural regime, originating in its current form from 1963, has several flaws. These flaws increase the probability that the Parliament will approach its procedural task in ministerial impeachment cases based on a political decisional modality, instead of a legalistic decisional modality. The current regime effectively offsets the risk of false convictions but is ineffective in avoiding impunity for culpable actions of ministers. Ministers thus face a different procedural reality than the public in Iceland, who must as a rule bear criminal responsibility for culpable employment behaviour. Peer reviewed Article in Journal/Newspaper Iceland Opin vísindi (Iceland)
institution Open Polar
collection Opin vísindi (Iceland)
op_collection_id ftopinvisindi
language Icelandic
topic Ministerial accountability
Court of Impeachment
Constitutional law
Procedural law
Lögfræði
SDG 16 - Friður og réttlæti
spellingShingle Ministerial accountability
Court of Impeachment
Constitutional law
Procedural law
Lögfræði
SDG 16 - Friður og réttlæti
Karlsson, Haukur Logi
Hlutverk Alþingis í réttarfari ráðherraábyrgðarmála
topic_facet Ministerial accountability
Court of Impeachment
Constitutional law
Procedural law
Lögfræði
SDG 16 - Friður og réttlæti
description In this article the procedural role of the Icelandic Parliament in ministerial impeachment cases is analysed in view of the historical lineage of the current system and the experience of the first such case against the former prime minister Geir H. Haarde. The focus of analysis is on three complaints about the current procedural role of the Icelandic Parliament, and these assessed based on theories of social institutions that are tasked with making adjudicative decisions. It is revealed that the procedural regime, originating in its current form from 1963, has several flaws. These flaws increase the probability that the Parliament will approach its procedural task in ministerial impeachment cases based on a political decisional modality, instead of a legalistic decisional modality. The current regime effectively offsets the risk of false convictions but is ineffective in avoiding impunity for culpable actions of ministers. Ministers thus face a different procedural reality than the public in Iceland, who must as a rule bear criminal responsibility for culpable employment behaviour. Peer reviewed
author2 Lagadeild
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author Karlsson, Haukur Logi
author_facet Karlsson, Haukur Logi
author_sort Karlsson, Haukur Logi
title Hlutverk Alþingis í réttarfari ráðherraábyrgðarmála
title_short Hlutverk Alþingis í réttarfari ráðherraábyrgðarmála
title_full Hlutverk Alþingis í réttarfari ráðherraábyrgðarmála
title_fullStr Hlutverk Alþingis í réttarfari ráðherraábyrgðarmála
title_full_unstemmed Hlutverk Alþingis í réttarfari ráðherraábyrgðarmála
title_sort hlutverk alþingis í réttarfari ráðherraábyrgðarmála
publishDate 2023
url https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11815/4469
genre Iceland
genre_facet Iceland
op_relation Tímarit lögfræðinga.; 73(1)
Karlsson , H L 2023 , ' Hlutverk Alþingis í réttarfari ráðherraábyrgðarmála ' , Tímarit lögfræðinga. , bind. 73 , nr. 1 , bls. 111–165 .
0493-2714
133254001
8f2e8c10-8e26-4304-99c4-dc729b4c1b5f
https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11815/4469
op_rights info:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess
op_doi https://doi.org/20.500.11815/4469
_version_ 1782335787824578560