Thoughts on the Future

2016 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Safe Space ◽  
Freedom Of Information ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
Bill Of Rights ◽  
High Court ◽  
The Public ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Principle Of Proportionality ◽  
The Right

Chapter 26 calls for the structure of the 2000 Act to be simplified. All exemptions should be subject to the public interest test. Freedom of information should be dealt with in the same way as environmental information. Government departments’ need for a safe space to develop policy should be clarified. There should be no extension of the right of veto. All executive override certificates should be referred to the High Court, which should review such certificates, applying the principle of proportionality, and the Court’s decision should be final. Freedom of information should be properly funded: it is part of access to justice which is fundamental to democracy. The recommendations of David Anderson QC’s report ‘A Question of Trust’ should be implemented. In the cold light of day, it is difficult to see what a British Bill of Rights could achieve which would be of benefit to the United Kingdom.

Zasada szybkości w postępowaniach w sprawach przygotowania i realizacji inwestycji infrastrukturalnych

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 ◽  
pp. 174-188
Author(s):  
Przemysław Ostojski ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
The Public ◽  
Constitutional Principle ◽  
Infrastructure Investments ◽  
Principle Of Proportionality ◽  
Administrative Proceedings ◽  
The Right

The article concerns the principle of speed in the proceedings regarding the implementation of infrastructure investments. The analysis of individual legal institutions is aimed at assessing statutory regulations of investment acts in the scope of the principle of speed. The aim of the analysis is to verify the assertion that the implementation of specific law-related rules in special investment documents connected with giving priority to the speed of administrative proceedings followed the constitutional principle of proportionality. As a result of the conducted analysis, it should be stated that the implementation of the principle of speed of proceedings to investment acts does not fundamentally violate the essence of constitutional rights of individuals – including the right to challenge decisions and the right to protect of rightly acquired rights. The legislator limits the principles of transparency, as well as the principle of active participation of the party in administrative proceedings, but does not eliminate these principles. Regardless of this, the legislator infringes in the analyzed Acts the essence of the party’s right to submit an application for temporary protection in administrative proceedings. The legislator violates in a qualified manner – due to the public interest – the rule of law and two-instance, preventing the appeals authority in the course of the instance of repealing the decision in its entirety, if the defect affects only its part concerning the property.

scholarly journals No Place Called Home. The Banishment of ‘Foreign Criminals’ in the Public Interest: A Wrong without Redress

Laws ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 26
Author(s):  
Helen O’Nions
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Family Life ◽  
Justice System ◽  
The Public ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Ethical Rationale ◽  
Appeal Process ◽  
Effective Remedy ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Right

This article examines the legal and ethical rationale for the deportation of ‘foreign criminals’ who have established their homes in the United Kingdom. It argues that provisions relating to automatic deportation constitute a second punishment that can be more accurately described as banishment. The human rights of those defined as ‘foreign criminals’ have been reduced to privileges that are easily withdrawn with reference to the ill-defined public interest. The ability to challenge deportation is then compromised by a non-suspensive appeal process that deliberately undermines the right to an effective remedy whilst further damaging private and family life. With reference to social membership and domicile theories of belonging, it is suggested that those who have made their lives in the UK and established their place and domicile here should be regarded as unconditional members of civil society. As such, they are entitled to equality of treatment in the criminal justice system and should be immune from punitive ‘crimmigration’ measures.

scholarly journals Reclaim the right to know toki and locate it online

2010 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 10-14
Author(s):  
Lisa Williams-Lahari
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Freedom Of Information ◽  
Right To Know ◽  
The Public ◽  
Talking Heads ◽  
The Right To Know ◽  
Governance Process ◽  
The Media ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Impact

Commentary: A Cook Islands proverb goes like this: Taraia to toki, ei toki tarai enua – ‘Sharpen your adze, the adze to carve nations.’ Applying the proverb in this context, the toki/adze can be seen as the media. The right to know is the tool which keeps the adze strong and effective. When the toki is well prepared for its work, the impact on public debate and protection of media freedoms is strongest. The diversity of news outlets and ‘talking heads’ in the public domain helps foster a sense of public participation; and ownership of the governance process. When the adze is blunted by lack of Freedom of Information legislation, or by the failure of media workers to pressure for the public interest and the right to know, we see the deadening impacts that many of us can attest to in our countries.

Transparency as a Human Right

2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick Birkinshaw
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Freedom Of Speech ◽  
Freedom Of Information ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
Right To Know ◽  
Government Information ◽  
Human Right ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Right To Know ◽  
The Right

‘Transparency’, ‘openness’, and access to government-held information are widely applauded as remedies for the deficiencies and operations of government where government claims to be democratic but falls short of its rhetoric. This chapter examines whether transparency is a human right, focusing on one of its specific features: access to government information, or freedom of information (FOI). It explains what is meant by FOI and argues that within the framework of internationally agreed concepts of human rights, FOI deserves to be listed with those rights. Not only is FOI instrumental in realizing other human rights such as freedom of speech and access to justice, or other desiderata such as accountability, it is intrinsically important: the right to know how government operates on our behalf. The chapter also discusses constitutionalism and the struggle for information in the United Kingdom.

An Overview

2016 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Public Authority ◽  
Freedom Of Information ◽  
Freedom Of Information Act ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
The Public ◽  
Codes Of Practice ◽  
Right To Information ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Relationship

The Freedom of Information Act 2000 is an unnecessarily complicated piece of legislation. Chapter 2 gives a simple overview of the Act: the framework for the new statutory right to information; the exemptions; the public interest test; the way in which the right is regulated through the Information Commissioner and codes of practice; enforcement through the tribunal system; and the relationship between freedom of information and data protection. The chapter considers the questions public authorities have to ask when someone seeks information and identifies the provisions concerning practice, procedure, and implementation, including the offence of altering records and the provision in section 78 that nothing in the Act is to be taken to limit the powers of a public authority to disclose information held by it.

Tanggung Jawab Hukum Penilai Publik terhadap Laporan Penilaian Kegiatan Pengadaan Tanah bagi Pembangunan untuk Kepentingan Umum (Studi Atas Kantor Jasa Penilai Publik Toto Suharto)

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gagah Yaumiyya Riyoprakoso ◽  
AM Hasan Ali ◽  
Fitriyani Zein
Keyword(s):  
Future Development ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Legal Responsibility ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Government ◽  
Conducting Research ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Systematic Explanation

This study is based on the legal responsibility of the assessment of public appraisal reports they make in land procurement activities for development in the public interest. Public assessment is obliged to always be accountable for their assessment. The type of research found in this thesis is a type of normative legal research with the right-hand of the statue approach and case approach. Normative legal research is a study that provides systematic explanation of rules governing a certain legal category, analyzing the relationship between regulations explaining areas of difficulty and possibly predicting future development. . After conducting research, researchers found that one of the causes that made the dispute was a lack of communication conducted between the Government and the landlord. In deliberation which should be the place where the parties find the meeting point between the parties on the magnitude of the damages that will be given, in the field is often used only for the delivery of the assessment of the compensation that has been done.

Freedom of Expression versus Privacy and the Right to Reputation

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dirk Voorhoof
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Media Freedom ◽  
Investigative Journalism ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Right Of Privacy ◽  
The One ◽  
Grand Chamber ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Impact

The normative perspective of this chapter is how to guarantee respect for the fundamental values of freedom of expression and journalistic reporting on matters of public interest in cases where a (public) person claims protection of his or her right to reputation. First it explains why there is an increasing number and expanding potential of conflicts between the right to freedom of expression and media freedom (Article 10 ECHR), on the one hand, and the right of privacy and the right to protection of reputation (Article 8 ECHR), on the other. In addressing and analysing the European Court’s balancing approach in this domain, the characteristics and the impact of the seminal 2012 Grand Chamber judgment in Axel Springer AG v. Germany (no. 1) are identified and explained. On the basis of the analysis of the Court’s subsequent jurisprudence in defamation cases it evaluates whether this case law preserves the public watchdog-function of media, investigative journalism and NGOs reporting on matters of public interest, but tarnishing the reputation of public figures.

Summary judgment — Quo vadis?

2021 ◽  
Vol 138 (1) ◽  
pp. 88-114
Author(s):  
Thino Bekker
Keyword(s):  
South African ◽  
Historical Development ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
High Court ◽  
The Core ◽  
Golden Opportunity ◽  
Quo Vadis ◽  
The Right ◽  
Summary Judgment ◽  
Made In

The summary judgment procedure in South African law provides for a speedy judgment in favour of a deserving plaintiff where it can be shown that the defendant does not have a triable defence. In 2019 the Rules Board made certain drastic amendments to the procedure of summary judgment in the high court. In this article the historical development of the procedure of summary judgment will be discussed, and the new amendments to rule 32 of the Uniform Rules of Court critically evaluated. It will be argued that the amendments to rule 32 were unnecessary and that it may diminish the right to access to justice in civil disputes. It will, however, also be argued that there are some merits in the critique raised by the Rules Board in relation to rule 32 and that the Rules Board missed a golden opportunity to overhaul the entire summary judgment procedure in a more sensible manner and in line with the core constitutional values of s 34 of the Constitution. It will be argued that rule 32 should be replaced in its entirety by a new, more streamlined procedure, and some recommendations for legal reform will be made in this regard.

RIGHT OF ACTION TO CHALLENGE TRANSACTIONS THAT RESULT IN FOREIGN INVESTORS GAINING CONTROL OVER BUSINESS ENTITIES OF STRATEGIC IMPORTANCE

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 112-138
Author(s):  
D.A. FEDYAEV
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
Foreign Investor ◽  
Foreign Investors ◽  
The Public ◽  
Right Of Action ◽  
Judicial Proceedings ◽  
The Law ◽  
Business Entities ◽  
The Right

In the Russian Federation, as in a number of other economically developed countries, there are legal restrictions on the admission of foreign investors to participate in commercial corporate organizations of strategic importance for national defence and state security. Failure by foreign investors to comply with this mechanism leads to the nullity of transactions and, as a consequence, to legal disputes, the subject of which are mainly restitution claims. There have been numerous problems and academic debates in recent court practice regarding the reasons and the possibility of satisfying such claims. In particular, in view of the changed circumstances after the conclusion of the contested transaction, the real public interest is not always visible pursued by the claim for application of consequences of its invalidity. The author proposes that in the course of judicial proceedings in such cases, when the defendant raises the relevant reasoned objections, not only to state the fact of violation of the law by a foreign investor, but also to reveal the public interest defended by the foreign investor. The author proposes that, in such cases, the defendant’s arguments should not be limited to stating that the foreign investor has breached the law. If one is not established, a claim may be dismissed under certain conditions, taking into account established doctrinal approaches to the understanding of the right of action.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document