从公安资讯收集谈公民资讯隐私权和自决权的保护

当今,资讯快速流通和运用,一方面满足了公民知的权利,另一方面也有利于交易的安全,从而促进经济的发展。但缺乏有效法律规制,会造成资讯的误用和滥用,从而侵害公民的合法权益。我们在强调政府信息公开的同时,还要重视公民的资讯隐私权与自决权。法律赋予了公安机关广泛的个人资讯收集权,公安机关在行使该项权力时如何在公益与私利之间找到平衡点,值得我们反思。     

论我国有局限的推出型信息公开法

我国《政府信息公开条例》属于注重主动公开的推出型的信息公开立法。该型立法得益于我国二十多年来的政务公开实践以及改善后的信息流通环境。但不可否认的是,我国《条例》的主动公开程度受到有缺限的依申请公开机制、宽泛和模糊的例外规定以及最大化公开原则缺省等多种因素的制约。     

美国高校信息公开研究

美国在信息公开立法和实践均走在世界前列,高校信息公开也不例外。美国高校有关信息公开的法律涉及联邦法、州法、高校规章制度和法院判例。原则上公立高校及其内部机构都适用信息公开法律;区分一般信息、涉及个人隐私的信息以及与高校特殊性质有关的高校自治和同行评议等学术信息,公开的属性、对象和方式均不相同。我国高校信息公开应当借鉴美国经验。     

试论会计信息失真的危害、根源和对策

会计信息失真给市场经济的健康发展、现代企业制度的建立健全带来了危害。它主要根源于利益驱使、企业产权制度不明、会计准则运用存在问题和对信息提供者的监督不力。为消除会计信息失真现象,必须建立现代企业制度、完善会计制度和准则、加强企业的内外部监督,以及提高企业会计人员的综合素质。     

上海公安教育信息化建设的认识和思考

公安教育信息化建设作为公安教育训练工作的重要建设内容,越来越受到公安机关和公安院校的重视。公安教育信息化建设必须与公安工作、职业教育和信息化建设的发展趋势相适应。上海公安教育信息化建设必须遵循"统一领导、统一规划、统一建设、统一管理、统一标准"的原则,按照"整体规划、战训对口、虚实结合、突出重点"的思路,依托和利用公安信息化建设的支撑和动力,加大投入,科学建设、规范管理,切实提高公安教育训练的效能和水平。     

To Disclose or not to Disclose? That is the Question in Collaborative Law

Collaborative Law (CL) is a dispute resolution process increasingly used in family law and divorce designed to encourage problem solving negotiations by parties represented by counsel. Many states have adapted legislation to authorize and facilitate CL and thousands of lawyers have been trained in the CL process. CL lawyers and participants sign a Participation Agreement in which they agree that the lawyers will be disqualified if the CL process terminates without settlement. They also promise full and voluntary disclosure of information. The extent of the obligation of disclosure is, however, unclear. Through analysis of an extended hypothetical divorce settlement negotiation, this article advocates that CL lawyers and clients should assume an obligation to disclose material facts without a request from the other side. Traditional legal ethics, based on an adversarial framework, requires only disclosure of information when requested by another party. In addition, in traditional legal ethics, a lawyer cannot disclose information obtained in the course of the lawyer‐client relationship without the client's consent even if material to the negotiation. Some authority regulating CL, however, suggests that CL participants and counsel should disclose material information without a specific request even if a client does not want the information disclosed. In that situation, the CL lawyer should encourage the client to disclose the information but if the client refuses to do so, withdraw from the representation. This Article reviews the arguments for and against an obligation of affirmative disclosure in CL. It suggests that affirmative disclosure obligations should be the subject of discussion between CL participants and lawyers and that CL Participation Agreements should be drafted to establish a clear obligation. Finally, this article identifies key areas for further discussion and research on CL disclosure obligations.     

处置突发性公共事件时应对新闻传媒的策略

在处置突发性公共事件时,新闻传媒的作用不可忽视。为保证妥善处置突发性公共事件,公安机关应当认真研究应对新闻传媒的策略,准确把握突发性公共事件中新闻传媒的介入时间、方式,以引导新闻传媒正确发挥舆论导向作用。     

European national news

The regular article tracking developments at the national level in key European countries in the area of IT and communications – co-ordinated by Herbert Smith LLP and contributed to by firms across Europe. This column provides a concise alerting service of important national developments in key European countries. Part of its purpose is to compliment the Journal's feature articles and Briefing Notes by keeping readers abreast of what is currently happening “on the ground” at a national level in implementing EU level legislation and international conventions and treaties. Where an item of European National News is of particular significance, CLSR may also cover it in more detail in the current or a subsequent edition.     

Welfare improving ignorance and negligence rule

The literature considers that the ignorance of activity levels by the courts is a major source of inefficiency to minimize the social costs of accidents. In this paper, we show that the inefficiency of the negligence rule based on a standard of care (and correlatively ignoring the activity level) is not established if certain dimensions of care are not verifiable. In other words, if care and activity levels are the only relevant variables of the injurer's set of actions to reduce the risk of accident, it is true that inefficiency arises when the court ignores one element of this set. But, considering that some dimensions of care are in practice not verifiable, it can be efficient for the judge not to take into account the activity level of the defendant. We propose a simple model with three variables: observable and unobservable precautionary measures and activity level.

政府信息公开范围若干法律问题

政府信息公开范围的原则,是依法公开原则,不是"以公开为原则,以不公开为例外".依申请公开政府信息的基本标准,是利害关系标准,即"切身利益"标准,其中包含生产、生活、科研等工作、职业、活动需要."敏感信息"的标准,既涉及政府信息公开范围,也涉及政府信息公开程度,具有政治性、政策性和或然性特征.