Keywords
Law Reform Commission, value-consensus, ideology, criminal process reform.
Abstract
Barnes and Marlin have attacked the original paper written by me about the Law Reform Commission of Canada and the ideology of criminal process reform. The discussion which follows is not limited to being my response to their response: such a discussion would be fruitless and introverted to the point of boredom. Thus, although some of the discussion begins with Barnes and Marlin, it is not intended to end there, for indeed Barnes and Marlin have not really discussed much of the original comment at all. Their paper contains some discussion of the notion of consensus although, it is submitted, their discussion is largely a product of misunderstanding. However, Barnes and Marlin have not discussed any other attribute of the value-consensus model at all, nor have they dealt with the specific examples and criticisms raised in the original paper. Barnes and Marlin do not deal with the quite substantial body of literature, referred to and discussed in the original paper, which has surrounded the debate concerning the ideology of the criminal process and the criminal law, both as it is and as it should be.
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 International License.
Recommended Citation
M. R. Goode, “The Law Reform Commission of Canada, Barnes and Marlin, and the Value-Consensus Model: More about Ideology”, Comment, (1977-1978) 4:3 DLJ 793.
