The UK Justice and Security Bill 2012–2013: Using secrecy to legitimize the securitization of the law

2017 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 50-68
Author(s):  
Mark Pope

The Justice and Security Act of 2013 provides for closed hearings in civil cases involving security sensitive information. The author argues that the UK Government successfully created and reinforced the authority of secretive sources to ensure the Bill was passed. Such authoritative sources promoted imaginaries of a future attack but also the need to respect legal principles that protected members of ‘our’ community. The dynamics between these imaginaries and principles led to the passing of the Bill in its final form – approving closed procedures in court, but removing inquests and issues of the ‘public interest’ from the Bill. Moreover, deliberation of the Bill was represented as negotiated and rational, thereby providing the final Act with legitimacy in elite fields. This research outlines how secrecy may not only be an end-goal of securitization moves, but reference to secret intelligence can also be integral to the justification of these moves.

2021 ◽  
pp. 125-194
Author(s):  
Eva Micheler

This chapter describes the role of the directors. The duties of the directors are owed to the company and while the shareholders are the primary indirect beneficiaries of those duties, the law integrates the interests of creditors and also of wider society. The law is primarily focused on ensuring compliance with the Companies Act and the constitution rather than with the enhancement of economic interests. The Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986 serves as a mechanism through which the public interest is integrated into company law, while the UK Corporate Governance Code adds a further procedural dimension to the operation of the board of directors. The chapter then looks at how the idea of designing remuneration in a way that guides the directors to act either for the benefit of the shareholder or for the benefit of the company is flawed and has served as a motor justifying increasing rewards without bringing about commensurate increases in performance. It also analyses the duties of the directors to keep accounting records and to produce financial reports.


Author(s):  
Annie Sorbie

In this article I respond to the tendency of the law to approach ‘the public interest’ as a legal test, thereby drawing the criticism that this narrow notion of what purports to be in the public interest is wholly disconnected from the views of actual publics, and lacks social legitimacy. On the other hand, to simply extrapolate outputs from public engagement work into policy (or indeed law) is equally problematic, and risks being at best ineffective and at worst reinforcing existing inequalities. Given this apparent disconnect between these conceptions of the public interest, and the shortfalls inherent in each, this article scrutinises this disjuncture. I argue that the application of a processual lens to the construction of the legal and regulatory role of the public interest sheds light on how legal notions of the public interest, and attitudes of actual publics towards data sharing, might be reconciled. I characterise this processual approach as being iterative and flexible, specifically drawing attention to the way that multiple actors, processes and interests interact, change and evolve over time in the health research endeavour. This approach is elaborated through two case studies that illustrate how the public interest appears in law (broadly conceived). Its application provides novel insights into the ways in which the public interest can be crafted within and beyond the law to better inform the development of health research regulation.


2015 ◽  
Vol 54 (4) ◽  
pp. 926-946 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helen MacDonald

AbstractFrom the mid-twentieth century, England's coroners were crucial to the supply of organs to transplant, as much of this material was gleaned from the bodies of people who had been involved in accidents. In such situations the law required that a coroner's consent first be obtained lest removing the organs destroy evidence about the cause of the person's death. Surgeons challenged the legal requirement that they seek consent before taking organs, arguing that doing so hampered their quick access to bodies. Some coroners willingly cooperated with surgeons while others refused to do so, coming into conflict with particular transplanters whom they considered untrustworthy. This article examines how the phenomenon of “spare part” surgery challenged long-held conceptions of the coroner's role.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 112-138
Author(s):  
D.A. FEDYAEV

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.


2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 1859
Author(s):  
Yoki Kurniawan ◽  
Hanafi Tanawijaya

Notary is a position or ordinary we call as general officials appointed by the State and work to serve the public interest. Not only that, a notary also in carrying out its duties and authority must comply fully with the prevailing laws and regulations in Indonesia. Each position certainly has an ethics in the profession which is called a code of ethics, as well as a notary who has a code of ethics in his profession. But out there masi no notaries who violate the code of ethics as mentioned in the law, In accordance with the title of the author of the adopted method of research used is the normative research method supported by interviews that are expected to help answer the problems of this study. The authors conducted interviews with the supervisory board, notaries, and legal experts. In this case the notary has been declared guilty by the Regional Supervisory Board (MPD) and will proceed the case to the level of sanction by the Regional Supervisory Board (MPW) and after receiving the sanction it will proceed to the next level of Central Assembly (MPP) to be sanctioned which has been granted by the level of the Regional Supervisory Board (MPW).


2016 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 282 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernadette Richards

Objective This paper aims to demonstrate that any suggestion that there is a need for specific innovation laws is flawed. Innovation is central to good medical practice and is adequately supported by current law. Methods The paper reviews the nature of medical innovation and outlines recent attempts in the UK to introduce specific laws aimed at ‘encouraging’ and ‘supporting’ innovation. The current legal framework is outlined and the role of the law in relation to medical innovation explored. Results The analysis demonstrates the cyclic relationship between medical advancement and the law and concludes that there is no requirement for specific innovation laws. Conclusions The law not only supports innovation and development in medical treatment but encourages it as central to a functioning medical system. There is no need to introduce specific laws aimed at medical innovation; to do so represents an unnecessary legal innovation and serves to complicate matters. What is known about the topic? Over recent months, there has been a great deal of discussion surrounding the law in the context of medical innovation. This was driven by the attempts in the UK to introduce specific laws in the Medical Innovation Bill. The general subject matter – negligence and the expected standard of care in the provision of treatment – is very well understood, but not in cases where the treatment can be described as innovative. The general rhetoric in both the UK and Australia around the Medical Innovation Bill demonstrates a lack of understanding of the position of the law with regards to innovative treatment. What does this paper add? This paper adds clarity to the debate. It presents the law and explains the manner in which the law can operate around innovative treatment. The paper asserts that medical innovation is both supported and encouraged by existing legal principles. What are the implications for practitioners? The paper presents an argument that can guide the policy position in this area. It also provides clarity around the legal position and expected standard of care for those who are introducing innovative medical treatment.


Author(s):  
Poorna Mysoor

This chapter addresses policy-based implied bare licences. Unlike in the previous chapter, there is no contract in existence and no voluntariness on the part of the copyright owner, and indeed in some cases, no prior relationship between the parties. Historically, English common law has recognised an open-ended power of the courts to restrict or prevent copyright enforcement in the public interest, which has been acknowledged under section 171(3) of the UK Copyright, Designs, and Patents Act 1988. The chapter considers how a successful invocation of this provision implies a bare licence to achieve policy goals. Although there is no statutory equivalent of this provision in other common law jurisdictions considered here, the chapter explores if the power has nevertheless been exercised by the courts based on their inherent powers. Since policy-based implied bare licences produce the same effect on copyright owners as the statutory limitations or exceptions, the framework for implying this type of licence draws inspiration from the three-step test and the fundamental rights regime.


Author(s):  
Ruth Costigan ◽  
Richard Stone

Course-focused and comprehensive, the Textbook on series provide an accessible overview of the key areas on the law curriculum. This chapter first considers the definition of ‘terrorism’. It then turns to laws which the UK government has put in place to attempt to deal with this area, including proscription of organizations, modification of police powers, and various forms of restrictions on movement, including ‘control orders’ and their successors — terrorism prevention and investigation measures.


2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 549-573
Author(s):  
Honor Brabazon

While the privatisation of public space has been the subject of considerable research, literature exploring the shifting boundaries between public and private law, and the role of those shifts in the expansion of neo-liberal social relations, has been slower to develop. This article explores the use of fire safety regulations to evict political occupations in the context of these shifts. Two examples from the UK student occupation movement and two from the US Occupy movement demonstrate how discourses and logics of both private and public law are mobilised through fire hazard claims to create the potent image of a neutral containment of dissent on technical grounds in the public interest – an image that proves difficult to contest. However, the recourse to the public interest and to expert opinion that underpins fire hazard claims is inconsistent with principles governing the limited neo-liberal political sphere, which underscores the pragmatic and continually negotiated implementation of neo-liberal ideas. The article sheds light on the complexity of the extending reach of private law, on the resilience of the public sphere and on the significance of occupations as a battleground on which struggles over neo-liberal social relations and subjectivities play out.


2007 ◽  
pp. 100-113
Author(s):  
Liz Lee-Kelley ◽  
Ailsa Kolsaker

The central government in the UK is determined to employ new surveillance technology to combat the threat of terrorist activities. This chapter contributes to the important debate on the relationship between citizens and the government, by discussing not whether electronic surveillance should be used, but rather, when it is acceptable to the populace. From our analysis, we conclude that a reconciliation of state-interest and self-interest is critical for the success of e-governance; as such, electronic surveillance’s mission has to be about serving the law-abiding majority and their needs, and its scope and benefits must be clearly understood by the visionaries, implementers and the citizenry.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document