Abstract
<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title> <jats:p>This monograph analyses the role of victims as agents of accountability in prosecutorial decision-making, with a comparative focus on England and Wales and the United States. While prevailing accounts of victim participation tend to frame victims as holders of primarily private interests, this monograph proposes an analysis that reconceptualizes them as citizens capable of advancing the public interest. Through historical, empirical, and case-based analysis, the book shows how prosecutorial fallibilities—including systemic biases rooted in inequality—coupled with quasi-unfettered discretion create accountability gaps within state-centred models of prosecution. It examines mechanisms of state accountability such as private prosecutions, judicial review, and internal review schemes, illustrating how their potential for accountability differs depending on whether victims are recognized as advancing primarily public or private interests. Case studies demonstrate the limits of conceiving victim interests as private and the possibilities of substantive assessments of prosecutorial decisions when interests are understood as public. Drawing on democratic theories, the book advances a normative framework that positions the victim’s accountability role as a civic duty, enhancing transparency, legitimacy, and substantive equality in prosecutorial decision-making. Rather than undermining prosecutorial independence, this role can strengthen decisions by ensuring more accurate and context-sensitive assessments of responsibility. Ultimately, the book contributes to debates in criminal law and justice by proposing an accountability role that is reflexive and equality-driven. Its comparative and normative insights provide guidance for common law jurisdictions and beyond, highlighting the importance of recognizing victims as legitimate participants in shaping the public interest and holding the state accountable within criminal justice.</jats:p>