Is the meaning of good faith simply loose and rhetorical?
As for the definition of good faith, the reference to it being ‘loose and rhetorical’ is taken completely out of context. We were at that point seeking to explain why a legal definition of ‘good faith’ would not be appropriate because it has different meanings in law. At 3.170-3.189 we explain why we agreed with the judges that it was perfectly acceptable for the jury to apply concepts such as ‘good faith’ in judging defendants’ conduct, once a judge had decided there was sufficient evidence of it to go to the jury (and that is an important threshold check). Moreover, Transparency International’s own Bill rested entirely on the notion of a breach of good faith (not defined in law) as the basis for bribery (Report 3.140). Would TI have done this if they had thought the concept ‘loose and rhetorical’? I hardly think so. So, the Bill’s wording is not something completely new in this context. TI – people very experienced in tackling corruption through law – have recommended the use of this
