Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2pzkn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-01T11:16:08.238Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter Three - The Prosecutor as Gatekeeper

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 September 2009

Russell G. Smith
Affiliation:
Australian Institute of Criminology, Canberra
Peter Grabosky
Affiliation:
Australian National University, Canberra
Gregor Urbas
Affiliation:
Australian National University, Canberra
Get access

Summary

Prosecuting Cyber Crime

The extent of the prosecutor's involvement with cyber crime will vary from one country to another depending upon the prosecutor's role in the criminal justice system and on constitutional issues more generally. In civil law countries, the decision to begin an investigation may rest with the prosecutor, depending on whether coercive measures are necessary or special proceedings are required. Japanese prosecutors routinely direct investigations (Johnson 2002). Prosecutors also play a central investigative role in Korea and China (UNAFEI 1995). In the United States, especially at the federal level, prosecutors are involved well before a criminal charge is brought, and are often engaged in the planning, organisation and execution of criminal investigations. This early involvement tends to arise from constitutional restraints on criminal investigation that invite detailed and exacting prosecutorial oversight. The National District Attorneys Association, the peak body of all US prosecutors, has specified that the office of the prosecutor should review and approve all applications for search warrants, arrest warrants, and all applications for the use of electronic surveillance (National District Attorneys Association 1991, Standards 40.1–40.3).

In Scotland, the office of the Procurator Fiscal has direct involvement with the investigation of offences from the outset. In Northern Ireland, prosecutors have traditionally been relatively ‘passive’ recipients of evidence collected and presented to them by police. This reflects the British tradition of prosecutorial independence, which favours a degree of insulation from the police and from executive government.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×