A search on the Internet and one might find various meanings of ‘public interest’.
For example, Black’s Law Dictionary defines the term as “The general welfare of the public that warrants recognition and protection” and “Something in which the public as a whole has a stake especially an interest that justifies governmental regulation.”
In truth, however, there is no universal meaning to public interest, even if it usually refers to the notion of something that should be beneficial to the general public instead of a select group of individuals.
In fact, it can be used in various contexts within the law, which makes it more abstract rather than concrete. As the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales (ICAEW) explains:
“Asserting that an action is in the public interest involves setting oneself up in judgement as to whether the action or requirement to change behaviour will benefit the public overall – a far greater set of people than can be interacted with directly.
“It involves interference in people’s ability to go about their business or sometimes, as a positive policy decision, non-interference in the face of alternative actions.”
This is because the public interest has evolved deliberately as ambiguous and liable to changes with social mores and values over time. What is considered ‘in the public interest’ today might not be several years down the line.
“The public interest is not one homogenous undivided concept,” wrote Justice Brian Tamberline in a Federal Court Freedom of Information case in Australia.
“It will often be multi-faceted and the decision-maker will have to consider and evaluate the relative weight of these facets before reaching a final conclusion as to where the public interest resides,” he added.
For that, legal, regulatory and political authorities tend to have different interpretations of the term, even though they as representatives of the public sector are obligated to serve ‘in the public interest.’
Some law experts argue that the public interest should also be viewed beyond legal compliance and outcomes by taking into account elements that should take place within the process, procedure and ethics.
According to Deputy NSW Ombudsman Chris Wheeler (as cited by Associate Professor Jane Johnston from the University of Queensland in her article for The Conversation), these include:
- Complying with applicable law (both its letter and spirit);
- Performing functions fairly and impartially;
- Abiding by the principles of procedural fairness/natural justice;
- Acting reasonably;
- Ensuring accountability and transparency;
- Exposing corrupt conduct or serious maladministration;
- Avoiding or properly managing private interests conflicting with official duties; and
- Acting apolitically in the performance of official functions.
Thus, despite its ambiguity and its lack of a single definition, the public interest remains an indispensable aspect of the discourse, law, regulation and governance that define modern democracies.
