2321 records match your query:
|571. ||JULY 2002 Issue|
|International Terrorism: The British Response|
Harding, Christopher  Sing JLS 16 (Jul)
This article examines the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act enacted in the United Kingdom in response to the September 11 attacks in the United States last year. The article first identifies the critical framework of the discussion by analysing the reactive quality of the debate on terrorism and questioning the effectiveness of anti-terrorist legislation. The article then considers the concept of terrorism under UK law, before turning to a more specific discussion of the Act, particularly in three areas: tracking terrorist finance, detention and identification of suspected offenders and security measures. Finally, Part IX of the article also provides a European dimension in its discussion on some European Union anti-terrorist initiatives.
|572. ||JULY 2002 Issue|
|Terrorism and the Criminal Law: Singapore's Solution|
Hor, Michael  Sing JLS 30 (Jul)
Singapore's legal system has always made provision for dealing with terrorism directed at Singapore - this is its historical heritage. The centre-piece is the Internal Security Act which confers the power of indefinite detention without trial. Singapore was traditionally indifferent towards terrorism targeted outside of Singapore. This stemmed from the principle of territoriality. Things changed with the enactment of the United Nations (Anti-Terrorism) Regulations 2001 - a legislation which creates extra-territorial crimes for the funding and assisting of terrorist activities outside of Singapore. This discussion considers and compares both the old and the new.
|573. ||JULY 2002 Issue|
|Malaysia and the Internal Security Act: The Insecurity of Human Rights after September 11|
Lee, Therese  Sing JLS 56 (Jul)
This article seeks to illuminate the history of the Internal Security Act and its uses against terrorism and political opposition in Malaysia. Recent applications of the ISA and developments in judicial review are highlighted, revealing the disturbing implications of September 11 on human rights in the country.
|574. ||JULY 2002 Issue|
|Executive Lawmaking in Compliance of International Treaty|
Lim, C. L.  Sing JLS 73 (Jul)
Treaty obligations, including any obligation imposed by the Security Council under the United Nations Charter, are not automatically a part of Singapore law. In response to September 11, Singapore was therefore required to devise a flexible legal mechanism by which further and better domestic legal standards could be set in a timely fashion should the Security Council so require. The United Nations Act is that mechanism. A principal difficulty is that, in its drafting language, the Act is not confined to Security Council decisions to combat terrorism. Instead, whenever the Security Council of the United Nations calls upon the Government to apply any measure to give effect to any decision of the Council taken under Article 41 of the United Nations Charter, the Minister may, if he considers it necessary or expedient, issue regulations under the Act in order to apply those measures. In addition, Article 41 in itself is a potentially far-reaching provision. It authorises any measure short of armed force which the Council may consider appropriate in the face of a threat to the peace, breach of the peace or act of aggression. The Act therefore raises domestic questions about the extent and scope of the Minister's powers, about whether the courts may review the Minister's decisions, and if so what standard(s) of review may be applied by the courts. At common law in Singapore, even where the Minister characterises his decision as one involving "national security", that characterisation may be challenged on grounds of legal irrationality. Furthermore, on the proper construction of this Act, the Minister's decisions, it would seem, must also be based on the existence, and proper construction, of a binding Security Council obligation. Yet whether a Security Council resolution imposes binding legal obligations can sometimes present "mixed" legal and foreign policy questions. This may be reason enough for the courts in Singapore to exercise restraint when called upon to review the Minister's decisions taken under the Act.
|575. ||JULY 2002 Issue|
|South Africa's Legislation Against Terrorism and Organised Crime|
Powell, CH  Sing JLS 104 (Jul)
This article describes and analyses the two main pieces of legislation with which South Africa has responded to the phenomena of organised crime and terrorism, namely, the Prevention of Organised Crime Act and the draft Anti-Terrorism Bill. It identifies the main features of each and focuses on the elements which may be unconstitutional. It argues that the rights infringements in the Prevention of Organised Crime Act might, on the whole, be accepted as justifiable by the courts, but that those in the Anti-Terrorism Bill, in its current form, will probably not pass constitutional muster. A closing section compares the general severity of the anti terrorism and anti-organised crime measures with the measures required by the international regime, and concludes that they are substantially similar. In light of the fact that the legislature and executive may possibly be obliged to adopt the extreme approach taken in the legislation, the article concludes with a brief examination of the resulting conflicts between international and domestic law and between the different branches of government.
|576. ||JULY 2002 Issue|
|Fear of Freedom: Anti-Terrorism Laws and the Challenge to Australian Democracy|
Rogers, Nicole & Ricketts, Aidan  Sing JLS 149 (Jul)
The nature of the Australian government's proposed legislative response to terrorism is discussed in this article. The authors highlight the stifling impact of the proposed legislation on rights of peaceful protest and civil liberties in Australia. The proposed legislation creates a wide range of new offences with draconian penalties, despite the adequacy of existing criminal law. It also raises a number of significant constitutional issues.
|577. ||JULY 2002 Issue|
|Terrorist Property Rights in Singapore: What's Left after the United Nations Act 2001?|
Tham, Chee Ho  Sing JLS 176 (Jul)
In response to the events of September 11, Singapore is in the midst of enacting legislation to address the problem of terrorist financing. This article examines the practical application of the initial Singaporean response to address the specific concerns raised by United Nations Security Council Resolution 1373 (2001). In particular, it addresses whether the initial provisions enacted by Singapore to immobilize terrorist access to property and funding have a suspensory or extinctive effect, and the extent to which such provisions are consistent with a regime where terrorist-owned or -controlled property is confiscated by the state.
|578. ||JULY 2002 Issue|
|Electronic Surveillance and Privacy in the United States after September 11 2001: The USA PATRIOT Act|
Wong, Mary WS  Sing JLS 214 (Jul)
Electronic surveillance by the US Government and the corresponding implications for privacy protection have come under increased public scrutiny after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The USA PATRIOT Act, passed in response to the attacks and containing sweeping changes in this area, has alarmed many civil liberties groups. This article examines the nature of these changes in light of increased concerns over national security, and attempts to articulate the arguments advanced by both the US Government and privacy advocates with respect to the need and appropriateness of the legal response to the growing threat of terrorism.
|579. ||JULY 2002 Issue|
|English Fixed and Floating Charges in German Insolvency Proceedings: Unsolved Problems under the New European Regulation on Insolvency Proceedings|
B252;tter, Michael  Sing JLS 271 (Jul)
The article deals with English fixed and floating charges and their recognition under the new European Insolvency Regulation on Insolvency Proceedings 2002. With the EU-Regulation on Insolvency Proceedings coming into force on 31 May 2002 one has to be aware of even more diversified international cross-border insolvency rules. Its aim is to secure the simplification of formalities governing the reciprocal recognition and enforcement of judgments of courts and tribunals in insolvency proceedings, which have an intra-Community dimension. The Regulation is, therefore, only applicable for insolvency proceedings where the centre of the debtor's main interest, ie in the absence of proof to the contrary the place of the registered office, was situated within the European Union (intra-Community insolvencies). The EU-Regulation does not solve the problems of English security rights in other European jurisdictions. The article analyses to what extent English security rights are enforceable in Germany. English security rights are in various aspects not in compliance with the German public policy rule which has to be applied according to Article 26 of the EU-Regulation. Despite the fact English security rights can qualify as a right in rem under Article 5 of the EU-Regulation the public policy rule prevents their enforceability in German insolvency proceedings. As a result, English security rights, as they exist today, cannot secure English creditor interest effectively as regards assets situated in Germany.
|580. ||JULY 2002 Issue|
|Ignorance of Law, Criminal Culpability and Moral Innocence: Striking a Balance between Blame and Excuse|
Amirthalingam, Kumaralingam  Sing JLS 302 (Jul)
The ignorance of law rule, embodied in the maxim ignorantia juris non excusat, occasionally conflicts with the fundamental tenet of the criminal law that the morally innocent should not be penalised. It is argued that this rule needs to be reformulated so that reasonable ignorance of law is not excluded as a relevant consideration in criminal matters. A comparative approach is adopted and the discussion is primarily based on the laws of Australia and England with some reference to Canadian and United States jurisprudence. The Penal Code's apparent unequivocal rejection of ignorance of law as a defence has the consequence that local courts have had almost no opportunity to consider the ignorance of law rule and possible exceptions thereto, apart from merely reaffirming that mistake of law is not a defence. The comparative analysis suggests that the ignorance of law rule, while still applicable, has been whittled by several exceptions, the broad thrust of which is that a person who is reasonably ignorant of the law is in fact morally innocent and not deserving of criminal punishment.