Restrictions on cryptography in India – A case studyof encryption and privacy

The developments of technology in communications industry have radically altered the ways in which we communicate and exchange information. Along with the speed, efficiency, and cost-saving benefits of the digital revolution come new challenges to the security and privacy of communications and information traversing the global communications infrastructure. As is with any technology the misuse of technology is noticed similarly the encryption technology. Encryption and other advanced technologies may be used, with direct impact on law enforcement and therefore some restrictions are necessary in the interests of national security. The problem, however, is ensuring that the restriction is legitimate and solely for in the interests of national security, the state not being allowed to interfere and keep a track on individuals' activities and private lives without sufficient cause. The individual needs encryption to protect their personal privacy and confidential data such as medical information, personal financial data, and electronic mail. In a networked environment, such information is increasingly at risk of being stolen or misused. Therefore, encryption is critical to building a secure and trusted global information infrastructure. Digital computers have changed the landscape considerably and the entire issue, at its simplest level, boils down to a form of balancing of interests. The specific legal and rights-related problems arising from the issue of cryptography and privacy in the Indian context are examined in this paper.     

Why privacy is at risk

Dr Chris Pounder has been professionally involved in delivering data protection services since the time of the Lindop Report in 1978. Here he argues for an express link between the data protection and human rights regimes. Amberhawk is a new company founded by Chris in 2008 with Sue Cullen as the vehicle for the continuation of the information law training business previously operated by Pinsent Masons LLP.     

论法的价值与正义

正义始终是自然法的最高价值追求 ,是人类一种最基本的价值理想。正义在法价值论中有着稳定的统帅作用。法要成为正义之法应将正义很好的溶入其中。法同正义有着天然的联系 ,但法又不完全等同于正义。     

论程序行政行为的可诉性——以规划环境影响评价公众参与为视角

程序行政行为,原则上不能单独对其提起行政诉讼。何种程序行政行为例外可诉,需要结合个案,对维护行政效能、保障公民程序权利和实体权益等因素综合考量才能确定。规划环境影响评价过程中,公众能否参与以及参与的形式和内容都取决于相关行政主体的程序行政行为。对于此种程序行政行为,在法政策的层面,有许可对其单独提起行政诉讼的必要性;在法解释的层面,对其提起行政诉讼不存在受案范围和原告资格方面的制度障碍。     

宽严相济政策对犯罪控制效率的兼顾

宽严相济的刑事政策以促进社会和谐为基本价值目标,但这一政策对犯罪控制的效率可能产生一定的消极影响。犯罪控制效率同样决定着社会和谐的程度,因此,实施宽严相济刑事政策必须兼顾犯罪控制的效率。其主要对策是,借鉴《联合国反腐败公约》制定的反腐败策略,在立法和司法两个层面鼓励涉嫌犯罪者与刑事执法机关合作,并以现代侦查手段武装侦查机关,提高侦查、公诉机关揭露和证实犯罪的能力。     

《公务员法》的十大创新

《中华人民共和国公务员法》着力解决了公务员管理实践中的突出问题,在公务员范围、职务级别制度、考核、录用、奖励制度、职务任免、升降制度、培训制度、工资制度、辞职制度、申诉制度、职位聘任制度、法律责任制度等方面都有不少创新。     

《保守国家秘密法》修改述评

本文对保密法修改的几个重大问题进行了系统阐述。作者提出,公开与保密不可分割,本次保密法修改确立了公开优先的原则,等于隐含确认了公开是原则、保密是例外;保密行政管理部门应该准确定位,主要承担决策与监督职能,不应沦为一般的行政执法部门;本次保密法修改的缺憾在于未能在决策权的统一和充实保密行政管理部门的监督手段方面有更多的制度创新。     

附款行政行为探略

附款行政行为作为一种弹性行政管理手段越来越受到关注 ,为了更好地发挥其特殊功能 ,应从合法性、合理性和必要性等方面对其正当性提出必要要求。当附款出现违法或不当时 ,应根据附款在行政行为中的地位和作用来判断行政行为的效力。     

网络帮助行为刑法不法归责模式——以功能主义为视角

网络空间中的帮助行为实质不法具有行为对象上的不特定性、行为方式上的非外在可辨别性和侵害结果上的非实体性,网络帮助行为的不法归责模式因此具有独立化的必要。在功能主义的视角下,针对实质不法的特点,网络帮助行为不法归责模式凸显主观不法要素对不法归责范围的厘定效果和客观归责上的功能维护与管道治理的目标。网络帮助行为的不法归责不同于传统的犯罪参与归责模式,刑法对此类行为的规制较共犯归责原则宽松,但也应当对其进行合宪性解释,归责边界应当遵循社会宪治的理念,以社会功能分化的视角构建网络时代公民基本权利保护的刑法解释框架。     

“I WANT MY MOMMIES”: THE CRY FOR MINI‐DOMAS TO RECOGNIZE THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE CHILDREN OF SAME‐SEX COUPLES*

In child custody cases, courts will look to the best interests of a child to maintain visitation/custody rights only with the child's biological parent, not third parties. However, with a same‐sex couple, it is inevitable that one parent will not be the biological parent. Thus, when that parent is in a mini‐DOMA state, where same‐sex couples from non‐mini‐DOMA states do not have to be recognized, that parent will be viewed as a third party and lose all visitation/custody rights if the couple separates. This note advocates that mini‐DOMAs allow both the biological and nonbiological parents of a same‐sex couple to have visitation/custody rights of their children if it would be in the best interest of the children to do so.