Police Powers of Criminal Investigation: Principle or Pragmatism

1980 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 283-320 ◽  
Author(s):  
Terry Carney ◽  
Judd Epstein
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Criminal Investigation ◽  
The Public ◽  
Police Powers ◽  
Strong Case ◽  
Efficient Detection ◽  
The Individual

This article will examine the divergence between law and practice in criminal investigation by police and consider the degree to which it may contribute to an imbalance between the interests of the individual and the public interest in the efficient detection and investigation of crime. It will be argued that the imprecision of the existing law and the failure by the legislature to accord new, tightly-defined, specific-purpose powers to the police have made a major contribution to the pressure on police to misuse existing (and often more intrusive) powers or to exercise de facto powers not authorised by law. It is contended that this pressure often arises from a desire by police to find a more practical means of attaining agreed community objectives than that provided by the artificial standards of the existing law. A strong case can therefore be advanced in favour of refurbishing police powers to accord (more closely) with present conditions, while at the same time strengthening the safeguards cast around those powers. This article will argue that case.

The Principle of Proportionality

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Takis Tridimas
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Fundamental Principle ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
The Public ◽  
Principle Of Proportionality ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Constitutional Adjudication ◽  
Freedom Of Action

The principle of proportionality is the most oft-invoked and, in terms of its role in constitutional adjudication, the most influential principle of EU law. The principle was developed in continental legal systems, especially in Germany and France, in the twentieth century. Even at an early stage in the development of EEC law, proportionality had already been pronounced by the Court of Justice to be a fundamental principle deriving from the rule of law and requiring in particular that ‘the individual should not have his freedom of action limited beyond the degree necessary in the public interest’.

Should Research Ethics Committees Be Observing the Law or Working by Ethical Principles?

2005 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-26 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles Warlow
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Research ◽  
Research Ethics ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Ethics Committees ◽  
Unintended Consequences ◽  
Research Ethics Committees ◽  
Individual Interest ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Individual

Recent laws, and their interpretation, have made clinical research more difficult to do, and sometimes impossible. Furthermore the results of that research which can be done may even be unreliable. This is certainly against the public interest, and indeed the individual patient interest as well. But ethics committees have to abide by the law and so even though it is surely unethical to work against the public and individual interest that is exactly what ethics committees now have to endorse. The unintended consequences of the new regulations must be reduced by amending the law.

scholarly journals IN SEARCH OF THE SUBJECTIVE PUBLIC LAW: CONDITIONS FOR PARTICIPATION IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE

2019 ◽  
pp. 5-14
Author(s):  
Peter Chvosta
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
The Public ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
Public Rights ◽  
Administrative Act ◽  
The Law ◽  
Administrative Jurisdiction ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Public Right

Purpose. The article is devoted to the legal figure of subjective public right in the context of legal protection in administrative matters. Methods. Based on the historical development of administrative jurisdiction in Austria and Germany in the 19th century, the function of the subjective public right is discussed in more detail: When the legislator grants citizens subjective public rights (and thus enforceable claims against the administration), the citizen can assert his or her individual interests before the courts by means of a right of defence against the state. At the same time, this results in an external legal control of the administration (compared to a mere internal administrative control by way of disciplinary measures) and thus promotes the rule of law of administrative action, which is in the public interest. Results. By pursuing his subjective public right, the citizen acting in his own interest indirectly contributes to the correct enforcement of the law. In a sense, he acts as an assistant to the public interest. The granting of a subjective public right also limits the group of persons who can take action against an administrative act, since otherwise anyone could challenge an administrative act. If the legislator has not expressly stipulated in the law which persons are entitled to a subjective public right in which respect, the determination of subjective public rights can be difficult in individual cases: When the law provides for a permit subject to certain conditions, the addressee of an administrative act is necessarily entitled to obtain a permit if the conditions required by law are met. The question is more complex in the case of persons who are not the addressee of an administrative act but who are affected by its effects. In this case, it must be determined by way of interpretation whether the legal provisions whose violation the citizen claims to have violated were passed not only to protect public interests but also, at least, in the interests of individual persons. Only then is there also a subjective public right of the individual to compliance with this provision. Conclusions. The legislator can avoid difficulties of interpretation by means of clear rules on the granting of subjective public rights. In particularly important administrative matters (e.g. approval of infrastructure projects), where the granting of subjective public rights is not sufficient to ensure judicial control of administrative acts, a larger group of persons can be granted party status.

scholarly journals Digital health and digital information in the context of big data. An ethical insight on interests

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
M Mirchev ◽  
A Kerekovska
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Digital Health ◽  
Scientific Progress ◽  
Personal Data ◽  
Health Data ◽  
Individual Responsibility ◽  
Digital Information ◽  
The Public ◽  
Rational Argumentation ◽  
The Individual

Abstract Background Health data is the key link between the prospects we face in improving health services and the context of current information reality. In the field of public health, the sheer scale of data collecting, digitalization and use is already raising questions related to the ethical norms among different stakeholders. The fact that it is personal data at stake, confronts at least two views: the individual versus the public interest. The more we ease the process of health data aggregation and use, the more risks of possible harms we face. So, whose interest is a priority? Aim To consider if it is possible to balance the conflicting interests of individuals and society in the digital health era by advocating for mutual compromises and rational argumentation. Methods Ethical, documental and historical research. Results The amount of digital health related personal data transforms both opportunities for improved healthcare and research, and possible uncertainties related to improper use, harms, abuses, injustice. This nourishes individuals' doubts and potentially restricts the public interest by putting limits on future use of data. A balance between the confronting interests is needed. Granting ownership rights over data requires entirely new legal frame, since property rights hardly encompass the unique nature of information. Moreover, data is a valuable artefact, and ownership could provoke further commercialization. On the other hand, it is virtually impossible to put a separating line between commercial and ideal use of health data for care improvements and science. Our focus should be on the ideal use and essentially on insuring individual's privacy and confidentiality, but not at the expense of public benefits and scientific progress. Conclusions Health information is a powerful tool, and its utilization suggests compromises, which are possible if rational argumentation and support is provided to individuals with the aim to overcome the existing discrepancies. Key messages The appearance of digital health fully represents the dynamic information reality in which constructing a balance between different stakeholder’s interests is vital and not impossible to achieve. Healthcare prospects depend on our individual responsibility and willing to share as we have the data and the means to use and secure it, and we have the duty to do it.

scholarly journals SECURITY AS PUBLIC INTEREST IN CONSTRUCTION LAW

2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sławomir Zwolak
Keyword(s):  
Construction Industry ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Fundamental Importance ◽  
Special Importance ◽  
The Public ◽  
Construction Law ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Essential Prerequisite

Polish construction law refers to the public interest in an indirect way, which consists primarily of value within a framework of security. The concept of security in construction law covers a range of issues and is a term quite wide. The special importance of safety results from its fundamental importance for society. The need to ensure security in the construction industry, leads to the need to balance the public interest and the individual. Respecting the public interest expressed in security, it is an essential prerequisite for restrictions on freedom of construction. In addition, in the context of general security, the article presents relevant solutions resulting from the German and English model.

An Assessment of Recent Changes in the Uniform Accountancy Act

1999 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 54-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gary J. Colbert ◽  
Dennis Murray
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Professional Standards ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Certified Public Accountants ◽  
American Institute ◽  
Best Interest ◽  
Joint Effort ◽  
Occupational Licensing ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Individual

The Uniform Accountancy Act (UAA) is the product of a joint effort by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and the National Association of State Boards of Accountancy. It is intended to serve as a model for public accountancy legislation by the individual states, and is designed to protect the public interest, promote high professional standards, and advance the goal of uniformity across jurisdictions. In response to growing dissatisfaction with the current status of professional accountancy regulation, the UAA was substantially revised in 1998. Based on existing rationales for governmental involvement in occupational licensing, we assess whether selected changes reflected in the revised UAA are consistent with its stated public interest objective. We conclude that many, but not all, of these changes are in the public interest. Based on an economic theory of regulation, the paper also examines the likelihood that the states will adopt the proposed changes. Because the CPA profession is well positioned to significantly influence accountancy regulations, we hypothesize that the UAA changes which are in the best interest of existing members of the profession will tend to be adopted more quickly and more pervasively.

Predictive Genetic Testing: Congruence of Disability Insurers' Interests with the Public Interest

2007 ◽  
Vol 35 (S2) ◽  
pp. 52-58 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anita Silvers
Keyword(s):  
Genetic Testing ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Genetic Information ◽  
Disability Insurance ◽  
Predictive Genetic Testing ◽  
The Other ◽  
Genetic Characteristics ◽  
The Public ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
The Individual

The idea that disability insurers would benefit if the use of predictive genetic testing expands may seem little short of obvious. If individuals with higher than species-typical genetic propensities for illness or disease are identified, and barred or discouraged from participating in disability insurance programs, is it not obvious that the amount that disability insurers pay out will decrease? Is there any reason to doubt that insurers thus would gain advantage by promoting genetic testing? Writers on this subject typically have taken on faith that advantage goes to whoever knows most about the genetic characteristics of the individual seeking insurance. They therefore have assumed, without proving, that insurers’ interests lie with proliferating genetic information about insurance seekers.Consequently, from a perspective that gives priority to commercial interests, denying insurers the freedom to obtain genetic information about insurance seekers or holders appears obviously damaging and even unfair. On the other hand, from a perspective that gives priority to the interests of citizens who may use insurance, the greater use of and access to predictive genetic testing sets off ethical alarms.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document