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...
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Other Authors: | |
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 |