scholarly journals Electronic Evidence and Electronic Signatures

2021 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Associate Professor ◽  
Open Access Journal ◽  
World Intellectual Property Organization ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Electronic Signatures ◽  
Electronic Evidence ◽  
National University ◽  
Global Corporations ◽  
The Law ◽  
Law And Legislation

In this updated edition of the well-established practitioner text, Stephen Mason and Daniel Seng have brought together a team of experts in the field to provide an exhaustive treatment of electronic evidence and electronic signatures. This fifth edition continues to follow the tradition in English evidence text books by basing the text on the law of England and Wales, with appropriate citations of relevant case law and legislation from other jurisdictions. Stephen Mason (of the Middle Temple, Barrister) is a leading authority on electronic evidence and electronic signatures, having advised global corporations and governments on these topics. He is also the editor of International Electronic Evidence, and he founded the innovative international open access journal Digital Evidence and Electronic Signatures Law Review in 2004. Daniel Seng (Associate Professor, National University of Singapore) is the Director of the Centre for Technology, Robotics, AI and the Law (TRAIL). He teaches and researches information technology law and evidence law. Daniel was previously a partner and head of the technology practice at Messrs Rajah & Tann. He is also an active consultant to the World Intellectual Property Organization, where he has researched, delivered papers and published monographs on copyright exceptions for academic institutions, music copyright in the Asia Pacific and the liability of Internet intermediaries.

scholarly journals Dialogue: In Conversation with Elizabeth Minnich

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 51-72
Author(s):  
Huang Hoon Chng
Keyword(s):  
Undergraduate Education ◽  
Teaching And Learning ◽  
English Language ◽  
Vice President ◽  
Associate Professor ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Learning Center ◽  
Excellent Teaching ◽  
National University

At the ISSOTL Conference in Bergen, Norway (October 2018), we were privileged to have heard a lecture by Professor Elizabeth Minnich, on “People who are not thinking Are capable of anything: What are students learning, how are students learning it, and does it make them better people?” As a follow up, in November 2019, Chng Huang Hoon (then-ISSOTL Vice President - Asia Pacific) invited the ISSOTL community to field their questions for Professor Minnich. Questions from four ISSOTL members were received. TLI has provided the platform to enable us to continue that important conversation. The participants are: Elizabeth Minnich, philosopher, author, teacher, Distinguished Fellow (Association of American Colleges & Universities). John Draeger, Professor of Philosophy and Director, Teaching and Learning Center, SUNY Buffalo State, USA. Torgny Roxå, Associate Professor and Academic Developer, Excellent Teaching Practitioner, Centre for Engineering Education, Faculty of Engineering, Lund University, Sweden. Johan Geertsema, Associate Professor (University Scholars Programme) and Director, Centre for Development of Teaching and Learning, National University of Singapore. Chng Huang Hoon, Associate Professor (English Language & Literature), Associate Provost (Undergraduate Education) and Director (Chua Thian Poh Community Leadership Centre), National University of Singapore. This conversation is in 3-parts: 1) Part One: Thoughtfulness, Thoughtlessness, Thinking and Teaching 2) Part Two: Thoughtlessness, scholarly reflection, and Outcomes-based teaching and learning 3) Part Three: Intensive and Extensive SoTL

scholarly journals Letter to our readers

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 136
Author(s):  
Keith Ong
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Discovery ◽  
Case Reports ◽  
Surgical Techniques ◽  
Glaucoma Surgery ◽  
Chief Editor ◽  
Open Access Journal ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Official Journal ◽  
Kuala Lumpur ◽  
National University

Dear Readers, We would like to announce that Asian Journal of Ophthalmology (Asian JO) is now a fully online, open-access journal, without the registration requirements for readers. Although Asian JO is not listed on MEDLINE’S PubMed yet, it is indexed in Scopus and Google Scholar. Articles can be found either through those services or through our extensive archive. Asian JO was the official journal of the Southeast Asian Glaucoma Interest Group (SEAGIG). It was initially published in 1998 and, at that time, was one of the few journals in Asia for authors to publish in. Asian JO is now an international journal serving authors and readers around the world with a publishing team in three continents. The first publisher of Asian JO was Scientific Communications, based in Hong Kong, which later relocated to New Zealand. When the publisher retired, it became inactive. Fortunately, Professor Paul Chew along with his team at National University of Singapore managed to keep it afloat until Kugler Publications of the Netherlands became its official publisher. Paul asked me to join him in the role as Chief Editor as he needed to devote more time to develop his inventions, which include the micropulse transcleral laser therapy for glaucoma and the Paul Glaucoma Implant shunt. I was introduced to Asian JO when I asked Paul for advice on which journal to publish an article on the Ong Eye Speculum for glaucoma surgery. Asian JO promotes the publication of novel ideas and surgical techniques. Brief reports and case reports can convey clinical gems that will improve the management of ophthalmology patients. Some journals reject papers describing innovative ideas because they may not conform to the standard research presentation format, but we believe this is a crucial part of the process of scientific discovery. We have also re-established our role as the official journal of Asia-Pacific Glaucoma Society. For this reason, the next issue of Asian JO will be dedicated to abstracts for the Asia-Pacific Glaucoma Congress (APGC), to be held in Kuala Lumpur on August 14-16, 2020. Hence, Kugler Publications and Asian JO will be present at this conference, and we hope to meet readers and authors to discuss how we can improve the journal. With kind regards,Dr. Keith OngChief Editor

Editorial

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vu Chi Kien ◽  
Do Ngoc Minh ◽  
Nguyen Hoang Ha ◽  
Nguyen Linh Trung
Keyword(s):  
Good Practice ◽  
Scientific Publication ◽  
Associate Editor ◽  
Open Access Journal ◽  
Object Identification ◽  
Online Journal ◽  
International Visibility ◽  
National University ◽  
Standard Practices

Dear readers,The year 2017 marks the 55th anniversary of the Journal of Information & Communications of the Ministry of Information and Communications, and the 18th anniversary of its scientific publication – the Research and Development on Information and Communication Technology (RD-ICT) journal. Again, the purpose of RD-ICT is to provide a forum for researchers and professionals to disseminate original and innovative ideas in the fields of information technology, communications and electronics in Vietnam and worldwide.Without kind support and invaluable contribution of readers and authors, and hard work of the anonymous reviewers and editors under the former editorship of Prof. Nguyễn Thúc Hải, Prof. Trần Văn Lộc and Prof. Nguyễn Cảnh Tuấn, RD-ICT would not be what it is today – a total of 37 issues in Vietnamese and 14 issues in English.To contribute to the development of research in Vietnam, toward standard practices, high quality and international visibility, RD-ICT has been taking measures by following current practices of prestigious international research journals. In this editorial, we would like to inform you some of the things we have been doing lately.Since June 2014, RD-ICT has applied online journal management and publishing, thanks to the well-known open-source Open Journal System of the Public Knowledge Project, which is used by thousands of online scientific journals worldwide. The editorial board of RD-ICT is currently being extended to include international prominent scientists, thus forming a team of international associate editors, under the complementary technical editorship of Prof. Đỗ Ngọc Minh (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, United States), Prof. Nguyễn Hoàng Hà (University of Saskatchewan, Canada) and Prof. Nguyễn Linh Trung (Vietnam National University, Hanoi). Each submission is now assigned to an associate editor who then coordinates the review process and makes editorial decision.For improved paper quality in terms of organization and presentation, authors are guided to good practice of technical paper writing. In addition, accepted submissions are now copy-edited, by the corresponding associate editors, and laid out using LATEX.Apart from already being an open-access journal, RD-ICT is also looking into other measures to increase its visibility, such as all-English publishing, digital object identification, Google Scholar citation, and SCOPUS indexing.Taking the opportunity of informing the above changes, we would like to, again, express our sincere gratitude and appreciation to the readers, authors, reviewers and editors of RD-ICT, and to the leadership of the Ministry of Information and Communications and its predecessors – the Directorate General of Posts and Telecommunications, the Ministry of Post and Telecommunications – for their continued support and contribution to RD-ICT.We look forward to your comments and feedback for better developing the RD-ICT journal for Vietnam.Sincerely,Vũ Chí Kiên, Editor-in-ChiefĐỗ Ngọc Minh, Nguyễn Hoàng Hà, Nguyễn Linh Trung, Technical Editors-in-Chief

Book Reviews

2015 ◽  
Vol 53 (4) ◽  
pp. 1033-1036
Keyword(s):  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Empirical Studies ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Chicago School ◽  
Associate Professor ◽  
Law School ◽  
Hedonic Theory ◽  
The Law ◽  
Institute Of Technology

Matthew D. Adler of Duke University reviews “Happiness and the Law”, by John Bronsteen, Christopher Buccafusco, and Jonathan S. Masur. The Econlit abstract of this book begins: “Assesses how the law affects people's quality of life with a particular focus on criminal punishment and civil lawsuits. Discusses measuring happiness; well-being analysis; well-being analysis versus cost–benefit analysis; happiness and punishment; adaptation, affective forecasting, and civil litigation; some problems with preference theories and objective theories; a hedonic theory of well-being; addressing objections to the hedonic theory; and the future of happiness and the law. Bronsteen is a professor in the Loyola University Chicago School of Law. Buccafusco is an associate professor in the Chicago-Kent School of Law and Codirector of the Center for Empirical Studies of Intellectual Property at the Illinois Institute of Technology. Masur is John P. Wilson Professor of Law in the University of Chicago Law School.”

scholarly journals The Theory of Interpretation in Solving Contemporary Legal Issues: With A Focus on the Instrument of Ijtihad

2018 ◽  
Vol 150 ◽  
pp. 05056
Author(s):  
Abdulrahman M.A.Albelahi ◽  
A. Ali ◽  
Faten Mohmed ◽  
Metwally Ali
Keyword(s):  
Islamic Law ◽  
Legal Theory ◽  
Legal Issues ◽  
Legal Interpretation ◽  
Way Of Life ◽  
Essential Question ◽  
Judicial Reasoning ◽  
The Law ◽  
Law And Legislation

Since the beginning, legal theory has concerned itself with the establishment of principles and precepts that govern the procedure of legal interpretation, from the initial stages of the judicial reasoning down to the promulgation of ruling and their implementation, Islam is a total way of life. Muslims are obliged to abide by the rules of Allah in every aspect of their lives, always and wherever they live. However, the actual rules of Allah as given in the Qur’an and the sunna are limited. The Qur’an contains only six hundred verses directly related to laws, and there are approximately two thousand hadiths. The function of interpretation is to discover the intention of the Lawmaker of the matter, therefore, interpretat primarily concerned with the discovery of that which is rot self-evident the objective of interpretation is to ascertain the intention c the Lawmaker with regard to what has been left unexpressed as a matter of necessary interference from the surrounding circumstances. Sometimes, the textual sources did not provide detailed guidelines in which to derive the law, and then the role of interpretation is important to determine the law. In Islamic law the role of Ijtihad undoubtedly important in order to meet new problems. But some of the Jurist contended that the role of Ijtihad had ended and we have to follow the rule that has been stated. An explanation given to this trend is that a point had been reached at which all essential question of law had been thoroughly discussed and further deliberation was deemed unnecessary. In Common law, man-made law and legislation are related to one another within a philosophy of law. Parliament makes law and it is the duty of the courts to give effect to them if properly enacted. While courts may rule that a particular statute or section is invalid for various reasons such as unconstitutionality, they cannot say, "We shall change this Act because it is not appropriate". That function belongs to Parliament (Wu Min Aun 1990: 120). So as in Islamic law, the Lawmaker is Allah S.w.t and the sacred text (Quran) is legislated due to His intention whereas Sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad is enacted due to the Prophet's intention. Therefore, Ulama of Usul Fiqh, in making any Ijtihad, they are du y bound to be guided by Quran and Sunnah.

scholarly journals SUATU KAJIAN YURIDIS TERHADAP PENGGUNAAN ALAT BUKTI ELEKTRONIK DALAM KEJAHATAN CYBER DALAM SISTEM PENEGAKAN HUKUM

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 11-25
Author(s):  
Ni Made Trisna Dewi,Reido Lardiza Fahrial
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Law Enforcement Agencies ◽  
Electronic Evidence ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Law ◽  
Witness Statements ◽  
And Function

Abuse in the electronic transaction because it is formed from an electronic process, so the object changes, the goods become electronic data and the evidence is electronic.  Referring to the provisions of positive law in Indonesia, there are several laws and regulations that have set about electronic evidence as legal evidence before the court but there is still debate between the usefulness and function of the electronic evidence itself, from that background in  The following problems can be formulated, How do law enforcement from investigations, prosecutions to criminal case decisions in cybercrimes and How is the use of electronic evidence in criminal case investigations in cybercrimes This research uses normative research methods that are moving from the existence of norm conflicts between the Criminal Procedure Code and  ITE Law Number 19 Year 2016 in the use of evidence.  The law enforcement process of the investigator, the prosecution until the court's decision cannot run in accordance with the provisions of ITE Law Number 19 of 2016, because in interpreting the use of electronic evidence still refers to Article 184 paragraph (1) KUHAP of the Criminal Procedure Code stated that the evidence used  Legitimate are: witness statements, expert statements, letters, instructions and statements of the accused so that the application of the ITE Law cannot be applied effectively The conclusion of this research is that law enforcement using electronic evidence in cyber crime cannot stand alone because the application of the Act  - ITE Law Number 19 Year 2016 still refers to the Criminal Code so that the evidence that is clear before the trial still refers to article 184 paragraph (1) KUHAP of the Criminal Procedure Code and the strength of proof of electronic evidence depends on the law enforcement agencies interpreting it because all electronic evidence is classified into  in evidence in the form of objects as  so there is a need for confidence from the legal apparatus in order to determine the position and truth of the electronic evidence.   Penyalahgunaan didalam transaksi elektronik tersebut karena terbentuk dari suatu proses elektronik, sehingga objeknya pun berubah, barang menjadi data elektronik dan alat buktinya pun bersifat elektronik. Mengacu pada ketentuan hukum positif di Indonesia, ada beberapa peraturan perundang-undangan yang telah mengatur mengenai alat bukti elektronik sebagai alat bukti yang sah di muka pengadilan tetapi tetap masih ada perdebatan antara kegunaan dan fungsi dari alat bukti elektronik itu sendiri, dari latar belakang tersebut di atas dapat dirumuskan masalah sebagai berikut, Bagaimana penegakkan hukum dari penyidikan, penuntutan sampai putusan perkara pidana dalam kejahatan cyber dan Bagaimanakah penggunaan bukti elektronik dalam pemeriksaan perkara pidana dalam kejahatan cyber Penelitian ini menggunakan metode penelitian normatif yakni beranjak dari adanya konflik norma antara KUHAP dengan Undang-undang ITE Nomor 19 Tahun 2016 dalam penggunaan alat bukti. Proses penegakkan hukum dari penyidik, penuntutan sampai pada putusan pengadilan tidak dapat berjalan sesuai dengan ketentuan Undang-undang ITE Nomor 19 Tahun 2016, karena dalam melakukan penafsiran terhadap penggunaan alat bukti Elektronik masih mengacu pada Pasal 184 ayat (1) KUHAP disebutkan bahwa alat bukti yang sah adalah: keterangan saksi, keterangan ahli, surat, petunjuk dan keterangan terdakwa. sehingga penerapan Undang-undang ITE tidak dapat diterapkan secara efektiv. Kesimpulan dari penelitian ini adalah penegakan hukum dengan menggunakan alat bukti elektronik dalam kejahatan cyber tidak bisa berdiri sendiri karena penerapan Undang-Undang ITE Nomor 19 Tahun 2016 tetap merujuk kepada KUHP sehingga alat bukti yang sah di muka persidangan tetap mengacu pada pasal 184 ayat (1) KUHAP dan Kekuatan pembuktian alat bukti elektronik tersebut tergantung dari aparat hukum dalam menafsirkannya karena semua alat bukti elektronik tersebut digolongkan ke dalam alat bukti berupa benda sebagai petunjuk sehingga diperlukan juga keyakinan dari aparat hukum agar bisa menentukan posisi dan kebenaran dari alat bukti elektronik tersebut.

Counterfactual Reasoning and Expropriation Compensation: An Argument for Elimination of Elimination Rules

2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sjur K Dyrkolbotn
Keyword(s):  
Legal Reasoning ◽  
Counterfactual Thinking ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Property Value ◽  
Counterfactual Reasoning ◽  
England And Wales ◽  
Legal Professionals ◽  
Unique Mode ◽  
The Law ◽  
Law And Legislation

AbstractTo award compensation for expropriated property, it is usually necessary to determine what the value of the property would have been if there had been no expropriation. This requires counterfactual thinking, a form of “make-believe” reasoning that legal professionals and valuators often find difficult to apply. The challenge becomes particularly difficult and important when the scheme underlying expropriation influences the value of the property that is taken. In such situations, rules developed in case law and legislation often attempt to clarify when aspects of property value should be attributed to the expropriation scheme and disregarded from further consideration. This article critically addresses elimination rules of this kind, arguing that they interfere with counterfactual assessments in ways that can render these assessments more difficult, less predictable, and more open to manipulation. To illustrate the overarching point, it is argued that recent proposals for reform in England and Wales, aiming to constrain the scope of contrary-to-fact elimination in expropriation cases, might not work as intended and could potentially make the situation worse. More broadly, the article argues that counterfactual reasoning in expropriation cases cannot be circumvented by legislative and casuistic interventions. Just as the law of tort, the law of expropriation compensation illustrates why counterfactual reasoning should be recognised as an irreducible and unique mode of legal reasoning, one that should be addressed as such by legal theorists and lawmakers alike.

Company Directors: Duties, Liabilities, and Remedies

2017 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Cayman Islands ◽  
Market Abuse ◽  
Company Directors ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Law And Legislation ◽  
Court Of Appeal

This is a new edition of the established authority on the law relating to directors of companies incorporated under the UK Companies Acts. The new edition features all important developments in the law including the Small Business, Enterprise and Employment Act 2015 which improves transparency (including requiring directors to be natural persons unless exceptions apply), simplifies company filing requirements, clarifies the application of general duties to shadow directors, modernises directors’ disqualification and reforms insolvency law to facilitate proceedings where there has been wrongdoing. There has been a wealth of new case law relevant to directors’ duties before the English courts, all of which are analysed and explained, including the Supreme Court decisions in Prest v Petrodel Resources, Jetivia v Bilta (UK), FHR European Ventures v Cedar Capital Partners and Eclairs Group v JKX Oil & Gas, the Court of Appeal decisions in Smithton Ltd v Naggar and Newcastle International Airport v Eversheds as well as the important High Court decisions in Universal Project Management Services v Fort Gilkicker, Madoff Securities International v Raven and the wrongful trading case, Re Ralls Builders. Non-UK cases are also analysed including Weavering Macro Fixed Income Fund Ltd v Peterson in the Cayman Islands’ Court of Appeal and the 2016 decision of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Chen v Jason. In keeping with developments in case law and legislation the book now includes expanded coverage of multiple derivatives claims, directors’ exposure to third party claims and a new chapter on civil remedies for market abuse. The third edition is a complete reference work on the law relating to company directors and is the first port of call for all serious corporate lawyers and scholars on this subject.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document