As to tying the hands of the crown and saying that under certain criteria you must, putting constitutional considerations as to division of powers aside, absent political motivation, what possible reason could there be to dictate to a crown attorney, who knows his or her case, that he must do something because of set criteria? Allow a crown attorney to do their job, look at the case they have, and make the determinations accordingly. Absent some political gain, why would you possibly do that?
On November 13th, 2007. See this statement in context.