Who would make criminal law, run prosecutions, and keep courts operating after independence?

Bottom line

The case in 5 pillars

1. Alberta already administers important justice functions

The current constitutional split matters: Parliament makes criminal law and procedure, while provinces administer justice and organize provincial courts [1]. Alberta already has court services and a Crown prosecution service inside that framework [4][5]. A pro-independence plan can argue that Alberta would not be starting from zero on courtrooms, prosecutors, clerks, sheriffs, victim-service interfaces, or local justice administration.

2. Criminal law could be continued before it is changed

A serious transition could copy the Criminal Code into Alberta law on day one, preserve pending charges and orders, and prohibit accidental gaps in offences, defences, procedure, sentencing, bail, warrants, and appeals [2]. The pro case is strongest when it treats continuity as a statute-by-statute exercise, not a slogan. Alberta could then decide later whether to amend criminal law in areas where voters want different policy, while preserving basic notice and rule-of-law protections.

3. Prosecutions could be kept file-by-file

Alberta's Crown Prosecution Service already conducts provincial prosecutions within the Canadian system [5]. A pro plan could convert that into an Alberta prosecution authority with explicit mandates for pending files, disclosure, victims, appeals, guidelines, special prosecutions, police liaison, and conflicts. The key pro claim is practical: existing personnel and file systems could be carried forward if the legal bridge is written clearly and funded.

4. Courts could be transitioned through legal continuity rules

Alberta's court system and court services exist now [4]. A pro-independence plan could preserve sittings, recognize judges and officers during a transition, maintain court rules, validate orders, and create an appeal structure. It could also negotiate temporary recognition of Canadian Supreme Court or Federal Court pathways if that were part of a broader settlement. The credible version does not assume courts "just continue"; it publishes how jurisdiction, appointments, appeals, and enforcement would work.

5. Local accountability could make justice policy more direct

Taken together, these pillars make the pro case plausible only as a staged legal-continuity project. Alberta could design a justice system, but the persuasive evidence would be draft statutes, negotiated agreements, implementation budgets, judge and prosecutor plans, custody arrangements, data-sharing rules, and public instructions for accused people, victims, witnesses, lawyers, police, and court staff.

Main weakness

• Objection: criminal law is federal today. Reply: correct. The pro case should not say Alberta already controls criminal law. It should say independence would require a new legal source for criminal law, likely beginning with continuity legislation based on the current Criminal Code [1][2].
• Objection: prosecutions and court files could be disrupted. Reply: that is the central implementation risk. A responsible pro plan would preserve pending proceedings, orders, disclosure obligations, limitation periods, appeal deadlines, warrants, and records in transition legislation and prosecution directives [4][5].
• Objection: Canada would control its own cooperation. Reply: also correct. Alberta could request agreements on extradition, prisoner transfers, evidence sharing, policing data, border enforcement, and mutual legal assistance, but it could not unilaterally bind Canada.
• Objection: rights and judicial independence could be weakened. Reply: a credible Alberta plan would entrench rights protections, preserve judicial independence, publish appointment and discipline rules, and give courts authority to review state action.
• Objection: the Supreme Court secession framework does not supply operational court rules. Reply: yes. The Secession Reference is useful for constitutional process and legal-continuity caution, not as a substitute for justice-system legislation [6].

• Alberta draft legislation continuing or replacing the Criminal Code, preserving pending cases, defining offences/procedure/sentencing, and protecting rights.
• A court-transition statute covering jurisdiction, judges, court staff, rules, records, enforcement of orders, appeals, and recognition of pre-independence judgments.
• Crown prosecution plans for pending files, disclosure, victims, appeals, special prosecutions, police liaison, staffing, training, independence, and public guidelines.
• Canada-Alberta agreements on extradition or surrender, prisoner transfers, criminal records, warrants, evidence sharing, mutual legal assistance, border enforcement, and federal facilities.
• Independent readiness reviews showing court capacity, prosecutor staffing, legal-aid capacity, corrections capacity, IT systems, budgets, and emergency continuity plans.