Governing digital societies: Private platforms,public values

Online digital platforms have deeply penetrated every sector in society, disrupting markets, labor relations and institutions, while transforming social and civic practices. Moreover, platform dynamics have affected the very core of democratic processes and political communication. After a decade of platform euphoria, in which tech companies were celebrated for empowering ordinary users, problems have been mounting over the past three years. Disinformation, fake news, and hate speech spread via YouTube, Twitter, and Facebook poisoned public discourse and influenced elections. The Facebook—Cambridge Analytica scandal epitomized the many privacy breaches and security leaks dogging social media networks. Further compounded by charges of tax evasion and the undermining of fair labor laws, big tech companies are facing a serious ‘techlash’. As some argued, the promotion of longstanding public values such as tolerance, democracy, and transparency are increasingly compromised by the global ‘exports’ of American tech companies which dominate the online infrastructure for the distribution of online cultural goods: news, video, social talk, and private communication (Geltzer & Gosh, 2018). As extensively discussed in our book ‘The Platform Society: Public Values in a Connected World’, the digitization and ‘platformization’ of societies involve several intense struggles between competing ideological systems and their contesting actors, prompting important questions: Who should be responsible for anchoring public values in platform societies that are driven by algorithms and fueled by data? What kind of public values should be negotiated? And how can European citizens and governments guard certain social and cultural values while being dependent on a platform ecosystem which architecture is based on commercial values and is rooted in a neolibertarian world view?     

医师在执业活动中的权利与义务

医师作为公民,享有宪法、法律和法规规定的一切公民权利,负有相应的法律义务。本文讨论的是,当公民依法取得医师资格,并经卫生行政部门注册准予从事医疗、预防、保健工作时,他（她）在执业活动中的权利与义务,也就是公民作为执业医师职业化的权利和义务。弄清楚这一问题,是对医师执业进行法制管理的前提和基础。     

医师在执业活动中的权利与义务

医师作为公民 ,享有宪法、法律和法规规定的一切公民权利 ,负有相应的法律义务。本文讨论的是 ,当公民依法取得医师资格 ,并经卫生行政部门注册准予从事医疗、预防、保健工作时 ,他 (她 )在执业活动中的权利与义务 ,也就是公民作为执业医师职业化的权利和义务。弄清楚这一问题 ,是对医师执业进行法制管理的前提和基础。一、权利与义务的一般法理权利是法律认可的或伦理上可辩护的要求或利益。详言之 ,权利是一种要求 ,一种利益 ,是一个人合法或合理 (合乎伦理 )的要求。这种要求是有根据、有理由的 ,而且所持根据或理由是使人充分信服的 ,因…     

Private thoughts of public representatives: assisted death, voluntary euthanasia and politicians

Assisted death and voluntary euthanasia have received significant and sustained media attention in recent years. High-profile cases of people seeking assistance to end their lives have raised, at least in the popular press, debate about whether individuals should be able to seek such assistance at a time when they consider their suffering to be unbearable or their quality of life unsatisfactory. Other recent developments include a number of attempts to legislate on the issue by the minor parties in Australia and the successful enactment of legislation in a few overseas jurisdictions. However, despite all of the recent attention that has focused on assisted death and voluntary euthanasia, a discussion of the adequacy of existing laws has not made it onto the political agenda of any of the Australian State or Territory governments. This is in spite of the fact that the private views of the majority of our elected Members of Parliament may be supportive of reform. This article explores the role of politicians' views and, as a case study, considers the opinions expressed by a number of Queensland Members of Parliament. In light of the views of these politicians and those of members of the public, as well as considerations arising from current medical practice, the article argues that there is a need for open political debate on assisted death and voluntary euthanasia. The article also suggests ways that such a debate may be achieved while minimising any political impact on governments that are prepared at least to consider this issue.     

The duty to warn/protect: issues in clinical practice

The duty of therapists to warn or protect third parties when a patient expresses a threat was established by the court in the Tarasoff decision. Confidentiality, disclosure, and prediction of violence are clinical, ethical, and legal issues that the therapist must address in the context of a therapeutic relationship. Clinical case material from the literature, as well as cases from the authors' experiences, indicate that when confidentiality is breached and a potential victim is warned, the therapeutic results may be positive, especially if the patient participated in the process. Other methods of protection, such as commitment, use of medications, police involvement, and confiscation of a weapon, may be necessary. Each case deserves individual consideration as to what appropriate and necessary steps should be taken. Through careful assessment of a patient's threats, concern for the patient and victim, adherence to ethical standards of care, and knowledge of the law, one can often protect a victim as well as engage the patient in an ongoing therapeutic relationship.     

Reconstructing ‘conflict of interest’ in financial markets: Private management, public challenges, future prospects

Following widespread criticism of financial market (self-)regulation, there is a shift in regulatory mood, explored here with reference to evolving conceptions of conflict of interest. The pre-crisis distinction between conflict of interest (normal, manageable) and its exploitation (unacceptable, legally actionable) has become somewhat eroded, as exemplified by the SEC’s 2010 civil fraud action against investment bank Goldman Sachs. However the settlement of that case on the basis of ‘mistake’ left many questions unanswered: about the meaning(s) of conflict of interest, about managerial mistake versus exploitative intent in administrative/civil cases and equally about the potential for action under criminal law. Looking forward, a judgement of the European Court of Justice on insider trading – concerning a rebuttable assumption of intent – could be taken as a template for ‘drawing the line’ on conflict of interest. Acting on the basis of informational asymmetry could be taken as an indicator of intent and serious wrongdoing unless financial market actors can demonstrate otherwise.     

论行政领导的职位责任与社会责任

行政领导的职位责任可细分为三个层面:政治责任、法律责任、工作责任,但作为个体的行政领导担负的职位责任并非是作为群体的政府所担负的义务责任的简单个体化。任何一个行政领导其行政角色都会被打上深刻的社会烙印,其行政活动也都直接同社会的其他过程紧密结合,因此行政领导所拥有的双重角色定位与其社会责任同样不容忽视。本文阐述了行政领导的职位责任、社会责任以及二者之间的关系,并进一步探讨了二者之间的理论基础与实践环节。     

Private antitrust enforcement and the role of harmed parties in public enforcement

It is commonly believed that the possibility to sue privately for antitrust damages increases the probability that anticompetitive actions are prosecuted at the cost of an increased probability that procompetitive actions are prosecuted. We extend the analysis by taking into account that private parties often submit evidence during public investigation. Such parties consider private suit as a partial substitute for public prosecution. The trial option might induce these parties to be less willing to contribute evidence to public cases. Private trials crowd out public prosecution. In effect, the probability of prosecution of anticompetitive actions might decrease, while the earlier result that the probability of prosecuted actions being prosecuted is confirmed. In general, while the attractiveness of trials weakly decreases by considering a reporting possibility, they can remain an enforcement efficacy increasing institution.     

谈公共行政实践主体的特征

公共行政实践活动是伴随着人类活动始终的一种社会活动,全面认识和了解公共行政实践主体极为重要。本文对公共行政实践主体的含义进行了探讨,分析了公共行政实践主体的内涵和特征,认为公共行政实践主体在公共行政实践活动中表现出的积极的能动作用缘于公共行政实践主体的基本特征。     

一起医疗执业卫生行政诉讼案例分析

通过对一起未取得《医疗机构执业许可证》擅自开展医疗执业活动的行为实施卫生行政处罚并因此引起行政诉讼案例的分析,探讨卫生行政处罚法律依据的适用,违法事实的认定和程序的合法性,值得借鉴。     

浅谈职务犯罪

职务犯罪主要表现是贪污贿赂、挪用公款等经济犯罪和渎职侵权犯罪，是腐败现象最突出的表现。中国的现代化建设和改革开放事业取得了巨大成就，然而腐败现象的黑影也在不断扩展，当前职务犯罪呈蔓延之势，给整个社会带来极大危害。本文分析了职务犯罪的内涵、特徵、危害及其成因，并从思想上、立法上、完善监督机制和加大打击力度等方面深入探讨预防对策，从源头上预防和治理职务犯罪。     

Lawyers,public relations and the media: a changing barter economy within a community of practice

We set out to explore the consequences of a new encounter between Israeli lawyers and PR people. This encounter occurred within a pre-existing barter economy between lawyers and legal journalists, composed of embedded and direct social ties. Using in-depth interviews and extensive archival research we analyse three strategies used by PR people to position themselves as brokers between lawyers and journalists: (1) commercialising social ties; (2) becoming translators; and (3) presentation of self as media advisors. Discussion centres on the consequences of the emerging barter economy to law and related occupations.