Walls of secrecy and silence

Research Summary Most analysts of the causes of the contemporary credit crunch have concluded that the supervising agencies failed in their duties. The same is true for studies of several major fraud scandals, including the Madoff affair and the Dutch construction fraud. The remedy seems immediately obvious: more and better regulation and supervision. However, this line of reasoning seems somewhat simplistic by ignoring the question of how illegal activities can remain hidden for many years from supervising agencies, victims, and bystanders. This research article argues that the problem also lies in the successful concealment of illegal activities by the perpetrators and in the presence of silence in their social environment. Policy Implications The cases analyzed in this article suggest that financial misconduct also could be controlled by breaking the conspiracies of silence. The strengthening of supervision is unlikely to be effective without simultaneous efforts to encourage people to speak out and to give them incentives to want to know and to tell the truth.     

确立沉默权之研讨

尽管目前人们对沉默权的概念有不同的认识,但在刑事诉讼法中规定犯罪嫌疑人享有沉默权则有其理论基础和诉讼价值,因而是十分必要的,同时也具备了一定的法制环境.关于规定沉默权的立法模式,主要有修改法条法、案外除外法、特别事项例外法、特殊情形例外法、不利推论法等建议,然而笔者认为,在我国现有条件下首先应确立"有限沉默权"原则,并且从起诉阶段起赋予犯罪嫌疑人以沉默权,据此,可在现行刑事诉讼法的基础上对相关条文作出适当修改.     

Wrapped in silence: psychotherapists and confidentiality in the courtroom

The impact of the Austrian Psychotherapy Act, which, in contrast to legal provisions in the United States, does not provide for any exceptions to breach confidentiality, is compared with the effects of U.S. law on dealing with confidentiality. The authors investigated the impact of this law in light of three common situations in psychotherapy that may jeopardize strict confidentiality: treating potentially dangerous patients, giving testimony, and serving as a psychotherapist in prison. Under the strict provisions of the Austrian Psychotherapy Act, a breach may be excusable in the case of a highly probable danger, but Austrian psychotherapists cannot be obliged to serve as witnesses or as experts in civil or criminal cases, as American psychotherapists can. Psychotherapy in prison, where release is contingent on the success of the therapy and the divulging of information could be in the interests of the patient as well as the court and the public, requires a modified dealing with confidentiality.     

The AIDS Crisis: Constitutional Turning Point?

Book Reviews in This Article:
William J. curran Larry Gostin, and Mary Clark, Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome: Legal and Regulatory Policy .