scholarly journals Data Protection Impact Assessments as rule of law governance mechanisms

Data & Policy ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Swee Leng Harris
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Data Processing ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Data Protection ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
Automated Data Processing ◽  
Just Society

Abstract Rule of law principles are essential for a fair and just society and apply to government activities regardless of whether those activities are undertaken by a human or automated data processing. This article explores how Data Protection Impact Assessments (DPIAs) could provide a mechanism for improved rule of law governance of data processing systems developed and used by government for public purposes in civil and administrative areas. Applying rule of law principles to two case studies provides a sketch of the issues and concerns that this article’s proposals for DPIAs seek to address. The article undertakes comparative analysis to find relevant principles and concepts for governance of data processing systems, looking at human rights impact assessments, administrative law, and process rights in environmental law. Drawing on this comparative analysis to identify specific recommendations for DPIAs, the article offers guidance on how DPIAs could be used to strengthen the governance of data processing by government in rule of law terms.

Reasons for EU double standards: comparative overview of the cases of the Erased and the Non-citizens

2015 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 302-318 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sanja Vrbek
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Violent Conflict ◽  
Local Context ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Double Standards ◽  
Legal Provision ◽  
The Eu

On the basis of a comparative analysis of the case studies of the Slovenian Erased and the Latvian Non-citizens, the paper endeavors to identify the reasons for the EU involvement in the latter, but not the former case. These two situations are recognized as similar enough to be compared, and endure the counter-argumentation that the different EU approach is conditioned by the specifics of the local context, not by double standards. Hence, the paper comes to a conclusion that the involvement in Latvia has been conditioned by the fear of the potentially violent conflict, the existence of a proactive kin state, and a minority, significant in number, as well as the explicitly discriminatory legal framework that was in collision with the EU economic acquis. Thus, it has been inferred that double standards occur due to the lack of EU and international interest in these situations of human rights violations, where the powerful kin state and the minority, significant in number, are absent, do not have a potential to develop into a violent conflict, do not derive from explicitly discriminatory legal provision, and do not challenge the fundamental market freedoms of the EU.

scholarly journals Mexico and the United States in a Comparative Situational Approach

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 139
Author(s):  
Elisa Cruz Rueda
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
Indigenous Communities ◽  
The United States ◽  
Indigenous Community ◽  
European American ◽  
The Law ◽  
Legal Subjects ◽  
The U.S

This article performs a comparative analysis of the constitutional bases of the Mexican and U.S. legal systems, and how they are expressed in two case studies. Both case studies deal with human rights as expressed through a community’s relationship to territory. However, the communities in question are differentiated by their status as legal subjects. The U.S. case examines a community primarily comprised of European-American descendants; the Mexican case considers an indigenous community. Nevertheless, in both cases State involvement occurs that favors the interests of energy companies, rather than the expressed interests of the communities. The Mexican case documents an attempt to apply energy reform measures, without taking into account the rights of indigenous communities. The U.S. case shows how legal constructs have evolved to structurally favor corporate interests at the expense of human rights. These examples are used to demonstrate how democratic ideals, ostensibly protected by Mexican and U.S. constitutional systems, remain unfulfilled. While the case studies discuss how the law and the State relate to the governed, particularities exist due to the practices and procedures of the distinct governing bodies involved, and because the governed peoples - a community of European-American descent and an indigenous community in Mexico - are different legal subjects before the law. These are areas for future comparative analysis and beyond the scope of this article.

Sources and Content of the Pan-European General Principles of Good Administration

2020 ◽  
pp. 19-54
Author(s):  
Ulrich Stelkens ◽  
Agnė Andrijauskaitė
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Data Protection ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Soft Law ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
European Court ◽  
Relevant Case

This chapter examines the sources of the pan-European principles of good administration developed by the Council of Europe (CoE). It maps the degree of concretization these principles have reached, and how far they have spread concerning the classical and modern topics of administrative law. It scrutinizes the Statute of the CoE, the European Convention on Human Rights, and the (relevant) case law of the European Court of Human Rights, other CoE conventions (such as the CoE Convention on Data Protection, the Convention on Access to Official Documents, and the European Charter of Local Self Government), and the recommendations and other soft law on good administration of the Committee of Ministers and other institutions of the CoE. The chapter concludes that the principles deriving from these sources should not be considered as a loose bundle of various rules in administrative matters but instead form a ‘coherent whole’.

scholarly journals Order at the margins: The legal construction of interface conflicts over time

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 343-363
Author(s):  
NICO KRISCH ◽  
FRANCESCO CORRADINI ◽  
LUCY LU REIMERS
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Social Processes ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Economic Governance ◽  
Global Order ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
International Legal Order ◽  
Over Time

AbstractLegal multiplicity in the global realm, and the interface conflicts that ensue from it, are widely thought to have a destabilising effect, blocking the path towards a more integrated and perhaps constitutionalised global order. While this diagnosis may appear plausible if interface conflicts are seen as snapshots and rivalrous institutions as the main actors, it is less convincing if we regard these conflicts as part of social processes of contestation that define the relations between different norms over time. It is also less plausible if actors with other orientations – norm irritation or navigation – are taken into view. This article works towards a more encompassing account, both temporally and as regards actor orientations. It uses two case studies of conflicts at the interface between economic governance and human rights to probe the plausibility of its conjectures. Both cases appear as instances of prolonged norm contestation which, despite continued irresolution of the underlying conflicts as a matter of law, have resulted in a significant reorientation and (partial) consolidation around new interpretations. This suggests that interface conflicts, rather than destabilising the rule of law, may also open a pathway for change in the otherwise rigid structure of the international legal order

The Council of Europe and Pan-European General Principles of Good Administration

2020 ◽  
pp. 242-255
Author(s):  
Inger-Johanne Sand
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Family Law ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Access To Information ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Procedural Rights ◽  
The Impact

This chapter discusses the impact of the pan-European principles of good administration on Norwegian administrative law. The chapter claims that the European Convention on Human Rights and other sources of the Council of Europe (CoE) have generally contributed to strengthening the ‘rule-of-law tradition’ in Norwegian law. This contribution is especially palpable in specialized fields like migration, family law and local self-government. However, in other fields, such as administrative procedural rights and access to information, the impact of the CoE seems to have been limited because the corresponding national regulations preceded many of the relevant conventions and recommendations of the CoE. The chapter concludes that Norway shows a willingness to be influenced by new administrative law standards developed by the CoE.

Introduction

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-16
Author(s):  
Ulrich Stelkens ◽  
Agnė Andrijauskaitė
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Good Governance ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
Main Research

The Introduction outlines the notion, the main features, the sources and the scope of the pan-European principles of good administration developed within the framework of the Council of Europe (CoE). It elaborates on their relationship to EU administrative law in describing the characteristics of EU administrative law and contrasts it with the characteristics of ‘CoE administrative law’. Moreover, the Introduction discusses the commonalities of the research on the pan-European general principles of good administration with the research on European human rights law and the quest for a ‘European rule of law’. It furthermore examines the general concepts of ‘good governance’ and ‘good administration’, the differences between them and the relevance of these notions for the research on pan-European principles of good administration. It finishes with a presentation of the effectiveness of pan-European principles of good administration as a main research question and the approach thereto taken in this book.

scholarly journals Conceptualising A Role for The Common Law in Environmental Protection in Singapore

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-20
Author(s):  
Kenny Chng
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Environmental Protection ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Environmental Governance ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Common Law ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
The Common

Abstract In Singapore, the key institutions driving environmental protection are the legislature and the executive. The judiciary's role in environmental protection has thus far been relatively minor. By drawing upon environmental law theory and comparative analysis of other common law jurisdictions, this article explores avenues through which the common law can be engaged more meaningfully to further environmental protection in Singapore. A conceptualisation of environmental law as directed at furthering the rule of law by promoting carefully-considered and participatory environmental governance will be suggested as a fruitful way forward for thinking about the role of the common law in environmental protection. Drawing upon this theory, as well as the experience of other common law jurisdictions, the article proposes a set of concrete steps by which greater common law engagement with environmental protection in Singapore can be achieved.

Harmonisasi terhadap Peraturan Daerah No. 14 Tahun 2006 tentang Pengelolaan Pelestarian Kawasan Konservasi Laut Daerah dalam Perlindungan Pulau Pariwisata Kabupaten Indramayu

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 142
Author(s):  
Saiful Kholik ◽  
Imas Khaeriyah
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Local Governments ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Policy Formulation ◽  
Marine Conservation ◽  
Environmental Damage ◽  
Conservation Area ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Impact

Inconsistency Regional Regulation No.14 of 2006 about marine conservation area of the island of Biawak, Gososng, which Cendekian provides protection but in fact failed to provide protection as evidenced by dredging island sandbar and cendekian conducted PT.Pertamina UP VI Balongan INDRAMAYU. The problem in this research How Formulation Policy Act No. 10 Year 2009 on the Indonesian Tourism with the Indramayu Regional Regulation No. 14 of 2006 regarding marine conservation area of the island of Biawak, Gososng, Cendekian And How Harmonization Act No. 10 of 2009 with the Indramayu Regional Regulation No. 14 of 2006 regarding formulation Act No. 10 Year 2009 on the Indonesian Tourism with the Indramayu Regional Regulation No. 14 of 2006 about marine conservation area of the island of Biawak, Gososng, Cendekian, the purpose of this research to understand and analyze the extent to which policy The findings of the community or field of law local governments about the environmental damage done by companies or individuals are not equal accordance with regional regulations in force, nor the Law in force so that the function of law in society indramayu not fit the mandate to establish a change and justice based Formulation public corporate criminal liability.Inskonsitensi happens to local regulation No.14 of 2006 makes no harmonized with the regulations of each other so that the impact of this inskonsistensi makes the sector particularly environmental law enforcement get uncertainties that result in coastal communities Indramayau.Conclusion Harmonization of regulations of the center and regions delivering the policy formulation of the rule of law area to comply with the regulations above in order to avoid inconsistency, the occurrence of this inconsistency resulted in the rule of law and justice for the indramayu, suggestion that the government should was nearly revise regulations related area, especially the government must dare to take action to give effect to the perpetrator deterrent effect rule-based running as well as possible.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document