Report on the Role of the UK Attorney General in Advancing Sustainable Development Goal 16

Introduction: Aligning Constitutional Governance with Global Sustainability Objectives

This report examines the constitutional role of the United Kingdom’s Attorney General, analyzing its functions and the conventions governing its powers through the lens of the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Particular emphasis is placed on SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions, which calls for the development of effective, accountable, and transparent institutions at all levels. The office of the Attorney General serves as a critical component of the UK’s institutional framework, and its operational integrity is fundamental to achieving key SDG 16 targets related to the rule of law, anti-corruption, and institutional accountability.

The Attorney General’s Mandate and its Contribution to the Rule of Law (SDG 16.3)

Core Functions and Responsibilities

The Attorney General’s position is integral to upholding the rule of law, a primary objective of SDG Target 16.3. The office holds several key responsibilities that ensure the government operates within a legal and constitutional framework.

1. Chief Legal Adviser to the Crown: Provides legal counsel to the government, ensuring that state actions are lawful and constitutionally sound.
2. Chief Counsel in Legal Proceedings: Represents the government in court, defending public policy and actions against legal challenges.
3. Guardian of the Public Interest: Exercises a range of prerogative and statutory powers to protect the public interest, ensuring the justice system functions effectively and protects the rights of citizens, particularly those unable to vindicate their own entitlements.

Powers in Criminal Law Enforcement

In England & Wales, the Attorney General holds significant authority over criminal prosecutions, which are conducted in the name of the Crown. These powers, while extensive, are exercised to ensure equal access to justice and the proper administration of the law.

• The power to stop any prosecution on indictment by entering a nolle prosequi.
• The authority to direct the institution of a prosecution.
• Statutory superintendence over the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and the Serious Fraud Office (SFO).
• The requirement for the Attorney General’s consent for prosecutions under numerous statutes, acting as a “gatekeeper to the courts” to prevent oppressive or improper legal action.

These functions are critical for maintaining a just and equitable legal system, directly supporting the ambition of SDG 16 to promote the rule of law and ensure justice for all.

Upholding Institutional Accountability and Transparency (SDG 16.6)

The Shawcross Principles: A Convention for Independent Governance

A significant check on the Attorney General’s discretionary powers is a constitutional convention established after the 1924 Campbell case and articulated by Attorney General Hartley Shawcross in 1951. This convention provides a robust framework for independent, quasi-judicial decision-making, directly contributing to SDG Target 16.6 on developing effective, accountable, and transparent institutions.

The ‘Shawcross principles’ mandate that:

1. The Attorney General must acquaint themselves with all relevant facts and public policy considerations before making a decision.
2. Consultation with government colleagues is permissible for informational purposes only; colleagues cannot dictate the decision.
3. The ultimate responsibility for the decision rests solely with the Attorney General, who must not be subjected to political pressure.
4. Considerations of personal or party political fortune are to be “altogether excluded” from the decision-making process.

This convention applies to the full spectrum of the Attorney General’s public interest functions, ensuring that powers are exercised impartially and for their intended purpose.

Combating Corruption and Improper Influence (SDG 16.5)

The Shawcross convention serves as a powerful, non-statutory safeguard against the abuse of power, directly addressing the aims of SDG Target 16.5, which seeks to substantially reduce corruption and bribery. By establishing a clear ethical and constitutional boundary against partisan or personal influence in prosecutorial and public interest decisions, the convention reinforces the integrity of the office and the wider justice system. It creates an institutional culture that is resilient to improper influence, ensuring that legal decisions are made in the public interest rather than for private or political gain.

Mechanisms for Scrutiny and Enforcement

Parliamentary Oversight as a Check on Executive Power

While the Attorney General’s public interest powers are not typically subject to judicial review, they are subject to intense parliamentary scrutiny. This political accountability mechanism ensures that the office remains responsive and representative, in line with SDG Target 16.7.

• Case Study: The 2006 SFO BAE Systems Investigation: The decision to halt an investigation into allegations of bribery involving Saudi officials prompted significant parliamentary debate and committee hearings. The Attorney General was required to publicly defend the decision-making process and demonstrate adherence to the Shawcross principles before Parliament.
• This episode illustrates that even the perception of a breach of convention triggers a rigorous process of political scrutiny, which serves as a powerful deterrent against the arbitrary exercise of power.

Collaborative Frameworks for Effective Justice (SDG 17.16)

The operational relationship between the Attorney General’s Office and the UK’s prosecution services is formalized through framework agreements. These documents clarify roles, responsibilities, and the limited circumstances under which the Attorney General will intervene in individual cases.

• These agreements represent a form of institutional partnership aimed at strengthening the effectiveness and integrity of the justice system, aligning with the principles of SDG 17 concerning partnerships for the goals.
• By publicly outlining these practices, the agreements enhance transparency and reinforce the operational independence of prosecutors, further contributing to the strength and accountability of the institutions as required by SDG 16.

Conclusion: Constitutional Conventions as a Foundation for Sustainable Governance

The discretionary powers of the UK Attorney General are not unbridled. They are disciplined by a robust and deeply ingrained constitutional convention that demands independence, impartiality, and a commitment to the public interest. This framework of non-judicial accountability is essential for building and maintaining the strong, effective, and transparent institutions envisioned in SDG 16.

• The Shawcross principles demonstrate that informal constitutional norms can be as effective as formal legal rules in preventing the abuse of power and combating corruption.
• The continued vitality of this convention, policed by parliamentary scrutiny and political culture, is a cornerstone of the UK’s commitment to the rule of law and sustainable governance.
• Achieving the targets of SDG 16 requires not only the creation of laws but also the cultivation of institutional integrity and character, as exemplified by the constitutional expectations placed upon the Attorney General.

Analysis of the Article in Relation to Sustainable Development Goals

1. SDGs Addressed or Connected

The article primarily addresses issues related to Sustainable Development Goal 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions. This goal aims to “promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels.”

• Strong Institutions: The entire article is a deep analysis of a key institution within the British constitution—the office of the Attorney General. It examines the powers, functions, and constitutional checks that govern this office, which is central to law enforcement and the administration of justice.
• Accountability: A core theme is the accountability of the Attorney General. The text debates whether judicial review is necessary for accountability or if existing mechanisms, such as “parliamentary scrutiny” and “constitutional convention,” are sufficient. The discussion of the *Campbell* case and the Saudi arms deal investigation highlights the political and public mechanisms used to hold the Attorney General accountable.
• Rule of Law: The article explores how the rule of law is maintained concerning one of the most powerful legal officers. It emphasizes the importance of the Attorney General acting “independently and quasi-judicially, free from pressure or direction from government,” which is a cornerstone of the rule of law. The “Shawcross principles” are presented as a key convention that disciplines the Attorney General’s power and prevents its arbitrary exercise.
• Anti-Corruption: The text touches upon the prevention of corruption by discussing the risk that “powers intended to be exercised in the public interest could lawfully be exercised for private benefit or other improper purposes.” It also references a real-world case involving “allegations that Saudi officials were bribed,” demonstrating the relevance of anti-corruption measures in the context of the Attorney General’s oversight of the Serious Fraud Office.

2. Specific Targets Identified

Based on the article’s content, the following specific targets under SDG 16 can be identified:

1. Target 16.3: Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all.
   • The article’s focus on the constitutional conventions that bind the Attorney General, such as the Shawcross principles, directly relates to promoting the rule of law. These principles ensure that prosecutorial decisions are made based on legal and public interest grounds, not “party’s or the government’s political fortunes,” thereby upholding the integrity of the justice system.
2. Target 16.5: Substantially reduce corruption and bribery in all their forms.
   • The article implicitly addresses this target by discussing the safeguards against the abuse of power for “private benefit or other improper purposes.” The controversy surrounding the decision to halt the investigation into bribery allegations in the Saudi arms deal is a direct example of the issues this target seeks to address. The subsequent parliamentary scrutiny serves as a mechanism to ensure such decisions are not influenced by corrupt practices.
3. Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels.
   • This is the most central target. The text is a detailed examination of the accountability of the Attorney General’s office. It contrasts judicial review with the existing accountability framework, which includes “the usual processes of parliamentary scrutiny” and the powerful “constitutional convention that helps structure and discipline the exercise of the Attorney’s public interest and criminal law enforcement powers.” The article argues these mechanisms make the institution effective and accountable even without court oversight.
4. Target 16.7: Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels.
   • The article highlights the role of Parliament in ensuring the Attorney General’s decisions are responsive. When controversies arise, the Attorney General is subjected to “sustained parliamentary scrutiny, assessment, and judgment.” This process, involving elected representatives, ensures that decision-making is scrutinized by a representative body, as demonstrated in the aftermath of the Saudi arms deal case, which was “thrashed out in the full glare of the public and political arena.”

3. Indicators Mentioned or Implied

The article does not mention official SDG indicators but implies several ways to measure progress towards the identified targets:

• Adherence to Constitutional Conventions: The article suggests that the strength and observance of the “Shawcross principles” are a key indicator of the health of the rule of law (Target 16.3) and institutional integrity (Target 16.6). The author notes the “dearth of incidents like the *Campbell* case” as evidence that the convention is taken seriously, implying that the frequency of breaches of this convention is a measurable indicator.
• Level of Parliamentary Scrutiny: The intensity and effectiveness of parliamentary oversight serve as an indicator of institutional accountability (Target 16.6) and responsiveness (Target 16.7). The article provides a concrete example: the response to the Saudi arms deal case involved “several parliamentary hearings and many written parliamentary questions and answers.” The existence and rigour of such scrutiny can be monitored as an indicator of an accountable system.
• Absence of Improper Influence in Decision-Making: An indicator for Target 16.5 (anti-corruption) is the extent to which prosecutorial and public interest decisions are free from partisan or corrupt influence. The article notes there are “no reported or alleged cases… of an Attorney General exercising their powers for a criminally improper personal purpose, like bribery.” The process of investigating and publicly debating any “faintest whisper that an Attorney General might be breaching the Shawcross principles” is itself an indicator of a system actively working to prevent corruption.

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org