Colt Technology Services v Ofcom – [2013] CAT 29 – Appealing a telecoms regulatory decision

A recent and interesting case (Colt v Office of Communications [2013] CAT 29) has shed some light on when and in what circumstances the decisions of the UK's telecoms regulator can be appealed.     

The problem with ‘dots’: questioning the role of rationality in the online environment

Regulatory theorists often use the ‘dot’ as a metaphor to help conceptualise their models of a given environment. Lessig famously used the ‘pathetic dot’ in his classic, ‘Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace’ and Murray’s ‘Regulation of Cyberspace’ used interconnected dots to help describe networked communitarianism and to discuss the effectiveness and implementation of symbiotic regulation. However in both models, the dot is seen as a rational actor. The rational ‘dot’ is presumed to have a complete set of preferences and the ability to gather all the necessary information in order to make an informed decision that optimally reflects their choices and preferences. However, research from psychology and, increasingly, economics has shown that humans are often prone to making errors in judgements. The paper argues that using the metaphor of dots to describe how rational actors behave in the digital environment is problematic. Actors deploy heuristics when making judgements, resulting in systematic errors and biases, often compromising the assumptions of the regulator. Accordingly, the way actors behave in the online environment is not rational at all; thus, models built on rationality start from a false premise.     

论宪法权利的构造

宪法权利的构造方式有两种,一种是规则构造,一种是原则构造。规则是明确命令,它的应用形式是涵摄,而原则是最优化命令,权衡是它独有的运用方式。原则构造迄今引发了诸多反对意见,最为重要的是对权衡的理性的质疑。本文是对权衡理性的辩护。通过发现和证立隐藏在德国宪法诉讼中合比例审查背后的衡量公式,文章尝试证明权衡是理性的,原则理论就此有能力成为宪法权利的基础学说。     

浅淡古希腊人性论

认识自我是哲学探究的最高目标,这一问题贯穿于古希腊哲学的始终,只是在不同时期,哲学家研究人性论的侧重点和表现形式有所不同。理性主义人性论是古希腊人性论基本基调,但同时也涉及到人的自然性、社会性等人性论思想。     

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。     

简论现代刑事司法理念

现代司法理念是最深刻,作用和影响最重要的法律意识,其内涵十分丰富,最为重要的是人权保护、正义与效率、自由与秩序理念。刑事司法工作人员必须具有刑事理性和程序理性的现代刑事司法理念,才能更好地保障人权和社会。     

High rates of prosecution and conviction in China: The use of passive coping strategies

This article demonstrates that the passive coping strategies utilized among Chinese police, prosecutors and judges could partly account for the high rates of prosecution and conviction in China. Passive coping strategies are defined as inactive tactics employed to avoid disagreements and conflicts among people or institutions. After a brief introduction, a review of the relevant statistic rates is offered, which indicates that both the prosecution and conviction rates remain persistently high. Next, an outline and evaluation of the formal intra-institutional relationships between the criminal authorities are offered. After that, a detailed account of the application of case dismissal tactics, a type of passive coping strategy, to the legal decision-making process is demonstrated. Finally, this article concludes with a discussion of the pros and cons of the use of passive coping strategies in the decisions to prosecute and convict, and offers some legislative recommendations.     

A three-year comparative longitudinal study of a school-based social work family service to reduce truancy,delinquency and school exclusions

New Labour is keen to use legislation to encourage what are seen as desirable family practices, and to discourage other, less-favoured, forms. What this means in policy terms has now been codified in its 1998 Green Paper, Supporting Families . In this paper, we examine the validity of this enterprise in terms of its underlying assumptions about social behaviour and economic decision making. We argue that the government implicitly assumes a universal model of 'rational economic man' and his close relative the 'rational legal subject', whereby people take individualistic, cost-benefit type decisions about how to maximize their own personal gain. Change the financial structure of costs and benefits, and the legal structure of rights and duties, in the appropriate way and people will modify their social behaviour in the desired direction. However, recent research suggests that people do not act like rational economic man in making decisions about their moral economy. Legislation based on this assumption might then be ineffectual and the proposals in Supporting Families seem to be one example. This is what we have labelled the 'rationality mistake'. In Part I of this work, we focus on the financial proposals in the Green Paper and on the New Deal for Lone Parents in particular. We then go on to counterpose this with the results of recent empirical work on how and why people actually do make family decisions. In Part II, to be published in the next issue, we focus on chapter four of Supporting Families , on strengthening marriage, and again compare New Labour's proposals with recent empirical work.     

New Labour’s communitarianism,supporting families and the ‘rationality mistake’: Part II

In Part I of this study, we argued that New Labour is keen to use legislation to promote what it sees as desirable family forms and to discourage other, less-favoured family practices. The codification of this approach in the 1998 Green Paper Supporting Families - and, in particular, the 'New Deal for Lone Parents' - was compared with recent empirical research on how people make decisions about their moral economies. We concluded that the government's approach is subject to a 'rationality mistake' - people do not make decisions in the way the government assumes and hence legislation can be inefficient or even oppressive. Here, we examine this contention further, this time focusing on chapter 4 of the Green Paper, indicatively entitled 'Strengthening marriage'. Using recent empirical research on mothers' views on marriage and cohabitation, we find further evidence of the 'rationality mistake', where the government has misunderstood the ways in which people make decisions about partnering and hence misplaces the role of family law. We conclude that supportive and flexible legislative frameworks are needed that recognize the varying ways in which people take moral economic decisions.     

Rationality,Normativity and Practices: Towards a More Inclusive Concept of Reason

Gonzalez Arnal attempts to make apparent certain relationships that exist between knowledge and rationality that, in her opinion, further the traditional relation of exclusion between women and reason. She argues that by challenging these relationships we can obtain a better understanding of what reason actually is, and this will allow us to develop a concept of rationality that does not exclude women and other communities.