Law and Democracy Insight is a peer-reviewed academic journal dedicated to advancing scholarly discourse on the intersections of law and democracy. The journal provides a platform for innovative research, critical analysis, and multidisciplinary approaches, fostering a deeper understanding of legal and democratic principles in theory and practice. The scope of the journal encompasses a broad range of topics, including but not limited to the rule of law, governance and public administration, human rights protection, constitutional development, electoral systems, and the impact of globalization and digital transformation on legal and democratic structures. By addressing both local and global issues, the journal aims to contribute to the development of inclusive, transparent, and accountable governance systems. Law and Democracy Insight welcomes submissions from academics, researchers, practitioners, and policymakers. The journal encourages contributions that demonstrate rigorous methodology, original insights, and practical implications, with the goal of bridging the gap between theory and real-world applications.
Human rights and nature-based strategies for environmental protection and preventing future pandemics
This article examines the proposed pandemic treaty, focusing on the Zero Draft released by the World Health Organization, and evaluates its effectiveness in preventing future pandemics. It argues that the current draft inadequately addresses environmental degradation as a key driver of zoonotic spillover and lacks robust mechanisms for implementing and enforcing legal obligations. The paper emphasizes the potential of human rights and rights of nature frameworks to strengthen environmental governance and advance the One Health approach, which integrates human, animal, and environmental health to mitigate pandemic risks. Drawing on rights-based approaches from other contexts, the article suggests these frameworks can drive meaningful policy reform and accountability to curb ecological destruction and biodiversity loss, thereby reducing disease transmission from nature. It critiques the Zero Draft for its limited incorporation of substantive rights, such as the right to health and a healthy environment, and procedural rights like participation and accountability. Furthermore, it highlights the absence of rights of nature, which could enhance environmental protection. The article concludes that a stronger emphasis on rights-based approaches in future drafts is essential to align with the One Health agenda, ensuring both human and environmental health are prioritized to prevent future pandemics. By addressing these gaps, the treaty could better tackle the root causes of zoonotic diseases and foster more effective global health governance.
Human Rights; Rights Of Nature; Environmental Governance; One Health; Pandemic Prevention
Copyright (c) 2023 Law and Democracy Insight
Designing equity crowdfunding regulations for legal certainty in the digital era
Equity crowdfunding serves as an alternative financing mechanism for micro, small, and medium enterprises (MSMEs) in Indonesia, yet it faces challenges due to insufficient legal certainty for stakeholders. This lack of clarity hampers its growth as a viable financing option for MSMEs. This study employs normative legal research, analyzing existing legal frameworks governing equity crowdfunding through statutory, comparative, and conceptual approaches. The findings reveal three key points: First, current Indonesian regulations on equity crowdfunding fail to ensure legal certainty for involved parties, leaving gaps in protection and enforcement. Second, many countries have developed regulatory frameworks focused on investor protection, promoting transparency and legal clarity to foster crowdfunding growth. These frameworks often balance investor safeguards with market flexibility. Third, to address these shortcomings, the study proposes a co-regulation model for equity crowdfunding in Indonesia. This model emphasizes collaboration between government and private stakeholders to create adaptive, transparent regulations that enhance legal certainty. By strengthening regulatory substance and enforcement, this design aims to mitigate risks, ensure investor protection, and support the sustainable development of equity crowdfunding, aligning with the needs of Indonesia’s digital economy and MSME sector.
Equity Crowdfunding, Legal Certainty, Regulation
The right to a fair trial in competition law enforcement: growing concerns from the indonesian perspective
The Indonesian Competition Supervisory Commission (ICSC) holds comprehensive powers, encompassing investigation, prosecution, adjudication, decision-making, and sanctioning of business actors who breach national competition laws. Additionally, it possesses the authority to formulate its own procedural regulations governing competition law enforcement. This concentration of powers presents significant concerns, especially regarding the protection of the right to a fair trial and the application of checks and balances. This article aims to examine the role of human rights, specifically the right to a fair trial, within the framework of competition law enforcement. The study concludes that such enforcement processes must operate within the boundaries of human rights standards, placing them as superior normative references. Drawing on Indonesia’s experience, the research reveals that the ICSC’s consolidation of functions conflicts with the country’s human rights obligations in enforcing fair competition laws. As a proposed remedy, the article advocates for reforms that align with human rights principles and strengthen checks and balances, such as curbing some of the ICSC’s powers and increasing the role of the Supreme Court in overseeing competition law enforcement.
Competition Law, Enforcement Procedures, Human Rights, Fair Trial, Indonesian Competition Supervisory Commission
Enhancing refugee rights in thai camps: integrating indigenous peoples' international law
This study explores the potential of International Law on Indigenous Peoples (ILIP) to enhance protections for refugees in Thailand’s camps by complementing International Refugee Law (IRL) and International Human Rights Law (IHRL). Over 90,000 refugees, predominantly Karen Indigenous Peoples from Myanmar, reside in nine camps along the Thailand–Myanmar border, having fled persecution. Thailand, not a signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention or its 1967 Protocol, lacks a formal asylum system and classifies these refugees as ‘illegal migrants,’ leaving them in a state of significant vulnerability. This paper argues that ILIP can address gaps in IRL and IHRL by recognizing the collective rights of indigenous refugees, particularly the Karen, whose cultural identity and communal needs are inadequately protected under existing frameworks. While IHRL provides universal rights applicable to all, and IRL offers specific refugee protections, neither fully accommodates the collective cultural and social rights crucial for indigenous groups. ILIP, through instruments like the ILO Convention 169 and the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, emphasizes collective rights to culture, self-determination, and traditional practices, which are vital for preserving the Karen’s identity in exile. By integrating ILIP with IRL and IHRL, this study proposes a more holistic protection framework that responds to the unique needs of indigenous refugees. The analysis underscores how ILIP’s focus on collective dignity can strengthen Thailand’s legal and policy approaches, ensuring better safeguarding of Karen refugees’ rights and cultural heritage in the camps.
Refugees From Myanmar; Refugee Camps Along Thailand–Myanmar Border; Karen Refugees; Thailand; Refugee Protection; Human Rights; International Law On Indigenous Peoples; Collective Rights; Indigenous Refugees; Complementary Role
Copyright (c) 2025 Law and Democracy Insight
Applying human rights perspectives to corruption: analysis of regulations and court decisions in Indonesia
This research investigates the linkage between corruption and human rights violations in Indonesia, focusing on anti-corruption laws and judicial outcomes. Employing a doctrinal legal approach, the study analyzes relevant legislation, including the United Nations Convention against Corruption 2003 and Indonesia’s Anti-Corruption Act of 1999/2001, alongside court decisions to explore how corruption infringes upon economic, social, and cultural rights. The findings reveal that various forms of corruption, such as bribery and embezzlement, directly undermine fundamental rights, including access to education, healthcare, and fair trials. A hypothetical scenario is used to illustrate the practical connections between these variables. However, the analysis of 100 randomly selected court verdicts indicates limited recognition of corruption as a human rights violation in judicial reasoning, with only a few cases explicitly linking the two. Notably, even when courts acknowledge this connection, it rarely results in harsher penalties, as human rights violations are seldom treated as aggravating factors, often leading to lenient sentences. The study underscores the need for broader recognition of corruption as a human rights issue through extensive research and advocacy. It recommends that law enforcement institutions, including the police, prosecutors, and judiciary, develop guidelines and provide ongoing training to better integrate a human rights-based approach in handling corruption cases, ensuring stricter enforcement and punishment to enhance accountability and protect citizens’ rights.
Crimes Of Corruption; Human Rights Violation; Regulation; Judicial Decision
Interaction of the 1980 hague convention and domestic violence in international child abduction cases
This article examines the complex challenges faced by mothers who abduct their children internationally to escape domestic violence, focusing on the implications under the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. These mothers encounter costly and intricate cross-border legal proceedings, and a court-ordered return may force them back into the abusive environment they fled. The study explores strategies to enhance protections for these vulnerable mothers during return proceedings, proposing judicial and legislative measures to address their plight. It also investigates the intersection of international child abduction law and refugee law, particularly when domestic violence allegations are involved. Special attention is given to Article 20 of the Convention, highlighting the increasing use of asylum claims as a defense against return orders and the associated human rights implications. The article identifies a critical area for further research: the relationship between domestic violence and asylum claims, emphasizing the need for a nuanced approach to balance the Convention’s objectives with the safety and rights of abducting mothers and their children.
1980 Hague Convention; Domestic Violence; International Refugee Law; 1951 Refugee Convention; Best Interests Of The Child; Article 20
New zealand’s medico-legal approach to digital harm: innovation or continuation of traditional responses?
This socio-legal commentary examines the growing issue of digital harm within New Zealand’s healthcare system, focusing on recent cases that illustrate the medico-legal system's response to this phenomenon. It investigates various instances to highlight the nature of digital harm in health contexts, questioning whether these incidents represent a novel form of harm enabled by new technologies or merely a reexpression of traditional unethical or unprofessional conduct. The commentary assesses the adequacy of New Zealand’s existing medico-legal framework in addressing digital harm and explores whether new legal or policies are necessary. The analysis indicates that current rights and disciplinary mechanisms can effectively handle cases where individuals suffer harm, leveraging established processes. However, the study identifies gaps in the framework, particularly concerning unregistered health providers and harm affecting professions or groups. It notes that these gaps may leave certain vulnerabilities unaddressed, as unregistered practitioners fall outside disciplinary oversight, and collective harm lacks clear remedies. Looking ahead, the commentary suggests that emerging challenges, such as misinformation and vaccine denial related to COVID-19, could test the system’s resilience. Given the limited research on digital harm in New Zealand’s health sector, this work aims to lay the groundwork for future studies, offering insights into the evolving intersection of digital technology and medico-legal accountability.
Fashion brands as art: exploring divergent thinking, copyright, and branding strategies
This study examines the dynamic relationships among copyright, branding, marketing, and cultural heritage protection within the context of fashion brands. Employing a combination of analytical-critical and legal-dogmatic approaches, the research integrates desk research, a case study methodology, and an extensive review of marketing literature. The analysis reveals that leading fashion brands leverage artification strategies to enhance their brand identity, captivate consumers, and boost financial performance. While artistic inspiration and design are central to the luxury and premium fashion sectors, the study demonstrates that major industry players often fail to comply with relevant legal frameworks. It highlights instances where prominent brands exploit the creative works of others, such as copyrighted art or cultural artifacts, anticipating minimal legal resistance from smaller entities like museums or foundations due to the high costs of litigation. These practices raise significant ethical and legal concerns, particularly regarding the unauthorized monetization of intellectual property. The findings underscore the tension between commercial interests and legal obligations, emphasizing the need for stronger enforcement of copyright and heritage protection laws to ensure fair use and respect for original creators. By exploring these intersections, the study contributes to a deeper understanding of how fashion brands navigate the complex interplay of creativity, law, and market dynamics
Fashion; Art; Brand; Copyright Law; Cultural Heritage; European Union Law; Art Appropriation
Should pharmaceutical companies relinquish covid-19 vaccine patents? A legal and ethical analysis with jewish perspectives
Pharmaceutical companies rely on patent protections to incentivize the development, production, and distribution of innovative products, including COVID-19 vaccines. However, these protections have created a conflict between intellectual property rights and global public health needs during the pandemic. Wealthy nations secured ample vaccine supplies, while low- and middle-income countries faced significant access challenges. Proposals to waive vaccine patents aim to enable broader manufacturing and distribution worldwide. This paper explores the rationale behind patent protections, the implications of patent waivers, and their ethical dimensions, including perspectives from Jewish ethics. It examines how patent systems drive innovation but may limit equitable access, particularly in developing nations, and evaluates the moral obligation to prioritize public health over profit. The analysis integrates legal frameworks, ethical principles like beneficence and justice, and Jewish ethical teachings that balance individual ownership with communal responsibility, offering insights into resolving this complex issue.
COVID-19 Vaccine; Patent Waiver; Jewish Ethics; Duty Theory
Copyright (c) 2024 Law and Democracy Insight
Critical analysis of managerial rights and responsibilities in limited liability company: legal framework evaluation
The roles and responsibilities of managers in limited liability companies, though seemingly well-established, remain a complex and evolving area of legal and managerial study. This research delves into the legal rights and duties of managers, who serve as the statutory representatives of the most prevalent type of business entity in many jurisdictions, specifically focusing on limited liability companies. A critical aspect of this study is the exploration of the legal relationship between the manager and the company, which is primarily contractual and commercial in nature. Unlike traditional employment relationships, the protections afforded to managers stem solely from their agreement with the company, highlighting the unique nature of this business-law dynamic (Commercial Code, §133–136). This contractual basis underscores the need for clear legal provisions to ensure fairness and accountability in managerial roles. The study critically examines the legal definitions of managers’ rights and obligations, as well as their accountability to the company, drawing on an extensive analysis of relevant judicial precedents. Beyond assessing managerial competencies, the research evaluates the adequacy of the existing legal framework in governing these responsibilities, identifying potential gaps that could undermine effective management or corporate governance (Săraru, 2023). The methodologies employed include legal analysis, synthesis, comparison, deduction, and descriptive techniques, which facilitate a comprehensive investigation of the legal principles shaping managerial functions. By comparing Slovak and Czech case law, the study traces the evolution of judicial interpretations and their impact on defining managerial roles, offering a cross-jurisdictional perspective on legislative effectiveness (Supreme Court of the Czech Republic, 1999, 2010). A central research question is whether the current legislative framework sufficiently regulates managers’ rights and duties or if legislative reforms are needed to enhance clarity and enforcement. The findings reveal that managers wield significant decision-making authority, including rights to compensation, profit distribution, and limited liability protections, which empower them to steer the company strategically (Jankelova et al., 2021). However, these rights are counterbalanced by stringent obligations, such as fiduciary duties, legal compliance, diligent record-keeping, and exercising professional care, which ensure accountability to the company and its stakeholders (Commercial Code, §135a). The study emphasizes the importance of managerial autonomy, which allows managers to make independent decisions, but stresses that this autonomy must be exercised responsibly to align with the company’s interests and avoid conflicts of interest (Patakyova & Gramblickova, 2020). The analysis also highlights the need to balance managerial powers with the interests of other stakeholders, particularly shareholders, to maintain equitable corporate governance. The implications of this research are significant for both managers and companies, as it clarifies the scope of managerial authority, underscores the importance of accountability, and advocates for a balanced distribution of power within the company structure (Horvat et al., 2017). By adhering to their defined rights and obligations, managers can effectively fulfill their roles, contributing to the company’s long-term success and sustainability. Ultimately, this study concludes that while the legislative framework provides a robust foundation for governing managerial roles, ongoing evaluation is necessary to address emerging challenges and ensure that managers can navigate their responsibilities effectively in a dynamic business environment.
Commercial Code; Manager; Limited Liability Company; Rights And Obligations
Examining post-apartheid anti-fronting measures to promote black south african inclusion in the corporate sector
During the colonial and apartheid eras, oppressive, discriminatory policies and laws systematically excluded the majority of black South Africans from participating in economic activities, enforcing racial segregation and socioeconomic marginalization. Since the advent of democracy in 1994, South Africa has implemented progressive legislation and policies to integrate black citizens into the economic mainstream, fostering active participation across various sectors. Despite these efforts, some white-owned corporations employ fronting practices—deliberate misrepresentations to bypass anti-fronting laws—thereby undermining the inclusion of black individuals in meaningful corporate roles. This study examines post-apartheid anti-fronting interventions designed to promote the integration of black South Africans into the corporate sector. Utilizing a literature review methodology, the research analyzes primary and secondary sources, including legal documents and scholarly works, related to equality, Black Economic Empowerment (BEE), and fronting. The analysis highlights how colonial and apartheid regimes used legal mechanisms to entrench economic exclusion, while post-1994 transformative laws aim to rectify these injustices. However, persistent fronting practices continue to hinder effective implementation. The government has responded by strengthening civil and criminal accountability measures and leveraging judicial processes to penalize offenders, ensuring compliance with anti-fronting regulations. The findings reveal that, despite amendments to the Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment (B-BBEE) Act, fronting remains a significant challenge. The paper recommends proactive anti-fronting strategies to enhance the mainstreaming of black South Africans, emphasizing robust enforcement and oversight to achieve equitable economic participation. These measures are critical to dismantling systemic barriers and advancing socioeconomic equity in South Africa’s corporate landscape.
Social-Socioeconomic Interventions; Corporate Sector; Inclusivity; Fronting; Black South Africans
Adolescent decision-making capacity for research consent: insights from law, ethics, and developmental science
This study examines the ability of adolescents to independently consent to participation in social science, humanities, and health-related research, drawing on insights from developmental science, law, human rights, and bioethics. Modern adolescents face complex challenges, including those posed by technology, violence, and climate change, necessitating their involvement in research to address individual and societal issues and advance Sustainable Development Goals. Such research is critical for understanding their experiences, identifying needs, and developing evidence-based solutions to pressing social problems. International and national research ethics guidelines emphasize the importance of balancing societal benefits with principles of autonomy, justice, and participant welfare, while minimizing harm. Additionally, global human rights frameworks, such as the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, affirm adolescents’ rights to express their views and participate in matters affecting them. Despite this, a common assumption persists that adolescents lack the capacity to provide their own consent, often requiring parental permission, which can hinder research progress, reduce participation rates, and compromise scientific outcomes. This article synthesizes multidisciplinary evidence to challenge these assumptions, demonstrating that adolescents, particularly those aged 16, possess the cognitive and developmental capacity to make informed decisions about research participation. Legal principles, including those recognizing adolescent competence, support their right to consent independently, with no universal requirement for parental involvement. Ethically, respecting adolescent autonomy aligns with principles of justice and non-maleficence, especially as research participation poses minimal risk of harm. While practical considerations may encourage parental engagement in discussions, and trauma-informed approaches are essential for sensitive topics, the evidence strongly supports adolescents’ entitlement to make their own participation decisions. By clarifying these issues, the study aims to resolve ongoing confusion, enhance adolescent participation in research, and inform reforms to ethics guidelines and legal frameworks to better align with adolescents’ capacities and rights.
Adolescents; Children; Capacity; Consent; Research Participation; Developmental Science; Law; Human Rights; Freedom Of Expression; Research Ethics Guidelines; Bioethics
Exploring justice aspirations of child sexual abuse victims in police investigative interviews
Investigative interviews with children reporting sexual victimization aim to capture their accounts of events in their own words. Beyond recounting incidents, children may express personal justice goals. This pioneering study analyzed 300 transcripts of real interviews with child complainants aged 3 to 15 years to explore this possibility. Extending prior research on adults, we examined the types of justice goals children articulate, the timing of these expressions within the interview, and the interviewer prompts that elicit them. Our findings indicate that most children voiced one or more justice goals, particularly a desire for recognition of their victimization and its wrongfulness. These goals were often expressed spontaneously, with minimal direct prompting from police interviewers. The results highlight the importance of listening attentively to children as active participants seeking justice, offering insights for institutions and researchers to better understand children’s agency in the justice process.
Children; Sexual Victimisation; Police Interview; Justice Goals
Reconciling conflicting approaches to children's decision-making capacity in australian health and criminal law
Children's decision-making is intricate, influenced by factors like cognitive development, maturity, upbringing, and circumstances. In Australia, health law recognizes children's autonomy, allowing mature minors to consent to beneficial medical treatment, yet it restricts them from making life-altering decisions against their best interests. Conversely, criminal law adopts a punitive stance, holding older children (aged 14 and above) fully accountable for their actions as adults, without considering developmental maturity or contextual factors. This creates a conflict: health law protects children's vulnerability, while criminal law imposes adult-level responsibility. This article examines whether these divergent approaches to assessing children's decisional capacity in Australian law can be reconciled. It critiques the mature minor principle in health law, which balances autonomy and protection, and contrasts it with the criminal law’s rigid age-based thresholds, such as the presumption of doli incapax for younger children. By analyzing these frameworks from a socio-legal perspective, the paper highlights inconsistencies and proposes aligning legal approaches to better reflect children's developmental immaturity, ensuring fairer treatment across both domains.
Children; Decision-Making; Capacity; Criminal Responsibility; Health Law; Criminal Law
Analyzing consent laws for trans and gender diverse minors seeking gender-affirming hormone treatment: a critique of australian jurisprudence and gillick competency
This article examines and critiques the Australian legal framework governing minors’ ability to consent to gender-affirming hormone treatment, with a focus on the application of the Gillick v West Norfolk and Wisbech Area Health Authority decision. The Gillick principle, which allows minors to consent to medical treatment if they demonstrate sufficient maturity and understanding, is well-established in law. However, Australian jurisprudence applying Gillick to gender-affirming treatment for minors with gender dysphoria has diverged from the original reasoning and its contemporary interpretations. The article traces the development of Australian case law, highlighting how it has misinterpreted Gillick by adopting an overly paternalistic approach. This has led to requirements such as mandatory court oversight or parental consent, even for minors deemed Gillick competent, which undermines their autonomy. The analysis begins by outlining the foundational principles of Gillick and its subsequent interpretations, providing a basis for evaluating Australian cases. It then reviews key Australian legal developments concerning minors’ consent to hormone treatment, critiquing the imposition of additional legal hurdles not supported by Gillick. The article argues that the current Australian approach creates inconsistencies, potentially affecting minors’ rights beyond gender-affirming care. It concludes by advocating for judicial clarification to realign the application of Gillick with its original intent, ensuring minors’ decision-making rights are upheld in gender dysphoria cases and other medical contexts. This is critical to address the broader implications of the current legal stance on minors’ autonomy in healthcare decisions.
Children And Consent; Gender Affirming Hormone Treatment; Gillick Competency; Gender Dysphoria; Gender Diversity
Evolving legal frameworks for children's and adolescents' decision-making: protection vs. Empowerment
Border pushbacks, increasingly normalized at the external borders of the European Union and by nations like Australia, Mexico, Turkey, and the United States, involve operations to block migrants from entering or staying in a territory. These actions often lack proper screening for protection needs, violating international laws against collective expulsion and refoulement. Pushbacks of children contradict the principle of prioritizing their best interests and other children's rights standards. Accompanying violations, such as excessive force, mistreatment, and family separations, exacerbate the harm. Despite challenges like inadequate oversight, judicial deference to governments, and official indifference, some domestic court decisions and initiatives offer hope for enforcing international standards and ensuring accountability. The article examines these practices, focusing on their impact on children, who face unique harms, and highlights the robust protections offered by international children’s rights norms, though these are often not upheld in practice. Pushbacks, part of broader strategies to evade asylum responsibilities, undermine the global protection framework and erode the rule of law, necessitating stronger accountability measures.
Asylum; Migration; Refugees; Unaccompanied Children; Pushbacks; Refoulement; Collective Expulsion; Family Separation; Rule Of Law; European Court Of Human Rights; Court Of Justice Of The EU
Children's involvement in decision-making for care and protection issues
Various jurisdictions have established legal and policy frameworks to enable children in child protection and care proceedings to voice their perspectives when decisions impacting their lives are made. This article examines whether these mechanisms effectively promote children’s participation and ensure their views are heard and appropriately considered, as mandated by Article 12 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which emphasizes giving due weight to children’s opinions based on their age and maturity. Using New South Wales, Australia, as a case study, the article explores the practical and theoretical dimensions of child participation, supplemented by international comparisons and socio-legal research. Findings reveal significant gaps in meeting Article 12’s standards across Australia and other regions. Many mechanisms fail to provide children with adequate information to navigate the process or foster meaningful engagement through trusted advocates who can accurately represent their views. Moreover, it remains ambiguous how children’s perspectives are interpreted and prioritized in decision-making. Research consistently shows that children often feel unheard and lack opportunities to express what matters to them. The article proposes several strategies to enhance legal frameworks, ensuring children’s views are better integrated into care and protection decisions, and highlights the need for culturally sensitive and child-centered approaches to uphold their participatory rights.
Child Participation; Children’s Views; Child Protection; Care And Protection; Procedural Fairness; Respect; Legal Representation; Culturally Appropriate Mechanisms; Article 12 UN CRC; Feedback Loops
Assessing china's sentencing standardization for illegal drug possession: achievements and challenges
Over a decade has passed since China implemented nationwide sentencing standardization to address inconsistent sentencing in criminal justice, particularly for drug-related offenses. An analysis of 1,595 written judgments on illegal drug possession reveals that the reform has significantly improved sentencing consistency for amount-based crimes. The reform has led to highly standardized judicial discretion, with a stronger correlation between drug quantities and imprisonment terms under similar circumstances, aligning closely with formal justice principles. However, the effectiveness of standardization diminishes as drug quantities increase, highlighting limitations in the standardized sentencing model. Challenges include the conflation of drug amounts and case circumstances, imbalances between crime severity and punishment, and inconsistent application of discretionary factors based on drug quantities. These issues underscore the need for further refinement in sentencing reforms to ensure legitimacy and balance. Future reforms should focus on enhancing the sentencing framework by integrating both formal and substantive justice, refining the model to better account for complex cases, and addressing discrepancies in discretionary sentencing. This study emphasizes the necessity of ongoing evaluation to strengthen the normative impact of sentencing guidelines and achieve equitable outcomes in China’s criminal justice system.
Sentencing Standardization; Justice; Conviction Model; Illegal Possession Of Drugs; Evaluation
Balancing the abducted child’s best interests against general child welfare in Australia, New Zealand, and The Pacific
A notable shift is emerging in Hague Convention jurisprudence within the Australasia/Pacific region, particularly in cases involving international child abduction. Courts are increasingly prioritizing the specific circumstances of the abducted child, focusing on the real consequences of their return, especially in situations involving domestic violence. This marks a departure from the traditional focus on swiftly returning children to their country of habitual residence to deter future abductions, with final decisions left to those courts. This article examines how jurisdictions balance the best interests of the individual child against the broader goal of preventing child abduction. By analyzing Australia, New Zealand, and Fiji, it highlights a growing emphasis on the particular child’s welfare, reflecting a more nuanced application of the Convention’s exceptions to ensure decisions align with the child’s unique needs and safety.
Child Settled Exception; Grave Risk Exception; Child Objection Exception; Human Rights Exception
Analyzing children's objections in hague child abduction cases across england and wales, australia, and the usa
This study examines how children’s objections to being returned to their country of origin are addressed in Hague Convention child abduction cases across England and Wales, Australia, and the United States. It analyzes the role of children’s views in the initial ‘gateway’ stage of the exception to mandatory return, exploring relevant legislation, judicial decisions, and academic perspectives. The research evaluates each jurisdiction’s approach in light of the Hague Convention’s goals and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. It highlights variations in methods for hearing children’s voices and their impact on children’s experiences. Recommendations are proposed to enhance consistency and clarity in considering children’s objections across these jurisdictions, aiming to better align practices with international standards and promote children’s participation in proceedings.
Child Abduction; Hague Convention; Children’s Rights; Children’s Participation; Children’s Objections; Comparative Law
Children’s decision-making and the law: exploring a rights-based perspective
This paper examines the legal frameworks shaping children’s involvement in decision-making through three distinct models: the property/instrumentalist model, the welfare model, and the rights-based model. It critically analyzes contemporary legal practices regulating children’s decision-making, evaluating them against the principles of a rights-based approach. The analysis focuses on three key areas: statutory minimum age requirements, presumptive age thresholds, and individual decision-making scenarios, particularly where the Gillick competency principle interacts with the court’s parens patriae jurisdiction. The paper argues that a rights-based approach permits minimum age rules and presumptive limits under specific conditions, ensuring they align with children’s evolving capacities. It also finds strong alignment between the rights-based approach and Gillick competency, offering a more nuanced framework for supporting children’s decision-making throughout childhood. Furthermore, the rights-based approach provides fresh perspectives on evolving the parens patriae jurisdiction, traditionally rooted in protection, to better uphold children’s rights and autonomy. By emphasizing children’s status as rights-holders, this approach seeks to balance their protection with their capacity for self-determination, advocating for legal reforms that enhance their participation in decisions affecting their lives.
Children; Decision Making; Human Rights; Gillick Competency; Rights-Based Approach
When criminals exploit blockchain: determining personal jurisdiction in a decentralized digital environment
Abstract The legal framework governing children’s and adolescents’ decision-making is evolving, navigating the delicate balance between protection and empowerment. This article examines key legal developments, focusing on the landmark Bell v. Tavistock case (2020, 2021), which highlighted tensions in recognizing minors’ autonomy, particularly in medical consent for gender-affirming care. The reversal of the initial ruling reaffirmed the Gillick competency principle, emphasizing individualized assessments of maturity over rigid age-based rules. Drawing on interdisciplinary insights from developmental science, bioethics, and human rights, the article explores how legal systems address children’s participation across domains like healthcare, criminal justice, and child protection. It critiques inconsistencies in applying principles like Gillick competency and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), which recognizes children as rights-holders. The analysis advocates for reforms that integrate developmental evidence and ethical considerations to foster equitable frameworks, ensuring children’s voices are heard while safeguarding their well-being. By addressing these complexities, the article contributes to advancing legal systems that respect children’s evolving capacities.
Children’s Decision-Making, Gillick Competency, Bell V. Tavistock, Children’s Rights, UNCRC, Autonomy, Protection, Developmental Science, Bioethics, Legal Reform
Jasta: evaluating civil procedure challenges in holding foreign entities accountable for terrorism sponsorship
Terrorism remains a pervasive global challenge, inflicting profound suffering and loss of life across nations. In response, the United States enacted the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA), a significant legislative measure designed to empower victims of terrorism to pursue legal accountability against foreign entities implicated in terrorist activities. This study critically examines JASTA through the lens of civil procedure to assess its efficacy in delivering remedies to victims and overcoming the complexities of holding foreign actors accountable. The analysis focuses on the pre-litigation phase of civil procedure, specifically exploring two critical components: the parties to the suit and the cause of action. These elements are evaluated to identify potential vulnerabilities that could undermine JASTA’s objectives when applied to foreign entities, as outlined in the act. Key preliminary considerations for initiating a civil lawsuit under JASTA are thoroughly investigated to highlight the act’s strengths and limitations in facilitating justice for victims. Employing a qualitative research approach, this study relies primarily on doctrinal legal research, drawing from authoritative sources such as legal texts, case law, and scholarly discussions on JASTA and procedural law. By dissecting JASTA’s framework, the research uncovers challenges in establishing causation, navigating sovereign immunity, and securing enforceable remedies, which often hinder plaintiffs’ ability to achieve meaningful relief. The findings offer valuable insights for refining JASTA and strengthening its application, enabling U.S. citizens affected by terrorism to effectively pursue claims against foreign states or entities complicit in their suffering. Furthermore, the study’s implications extend internationally, providing a foundation for other nations grappling with terrorism-related litigation to develop robust legal frameworks. By addressing gaps in JASTA’s civil procedure mechanisms, this research advocates for legislative improvements to enhance access to justice for victims globally. The analysis also underscores the need for future research to explore evolving challenges in terrorism litigation, particularly in the context of emerging threats like cyberterrorism, to ensure that legal systems remain responsive to the dynamic nature of global terrorism. Ultimately, this study contributes to a deeper understanding of JASTA’s role in balancing victim redress with the complexities of international legal accountability.
Justice Against Sponsors Of Terrorism Act (JASTA); Civil Procedure; Parties To The Suit; Cause Of Action; Foreign State; Terrorism; Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA); US Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA)
Comparative legal analysis of hunter-land user interactions in wildlife and land management regulations
Hunting is a multifaceted form of natural resource management that involves the use of both wildlife and land resources, necessitating clear legal frameworks to govern interactions between hunters and land users. This study examines the common and unique challenges in various systems regulating these interactions and evaluates the potential for applying successful strategies across different countries. Three primary models of hunter-land user relationships are analyzed: direct interaction, cooperation, and division of rights. Each model addresses specific objectives and varies in effectiveness depending on the context. The direct interaction model prioritizes landowner rights, the cooperation model enhances hunting accessibility, and the division of rights model facilitates management over large wildlife habitats. The choice of model in a given country is influenced by factors such as economic conditions, property laws, legal systems, social norms, and government policies. No single model is universally optimal, as each excels under specific circumstances. In Russia, issues in the hunting sector stem not from the division of rights model itself but from insufficient state oversight and support. The study proposes recommendations to refine...: improve the development and implementation of these interaction models, aiming to enhance their effectiveness and adaptability across diverse global contexts.
Law; Hunting Grounds; Land Use; Wildlife Management; Rights And Duties
In August 2022, the U.S. Treasury Department imposed sanctions on Tornado Cash, a decentralized virtual currency mixer operating on the Ethereum blockchain, marking the first time the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) targeted software as a sanctionable entity. This action led to the arrest of a developer in the Netherlands, highlighting the complexities of asserting jurisdiction over decentralized software with a global user base. Traditional jurisdictional claims, based on citizenship, residency, or assets passing through a country’s territory, are challenged by blockchain’s distributed nature, where nodes span multiple countries. This creates a dilemma: either numerous nations could claim jurisdiction, exposing users to conflicting criminal laws in jurisdictions with minimal connection, or limited jurisdiction could enable exploitation by malicious actors. The article adopts a comparative approach to analyze the difficulties in establishing criminal jurisdiction for cryptocurrency-related crimes. It examines how the global, decentralized structure of blockchain technology complicates traditional legal frameworks, proposing a balanced approach to protect individual rights while enabling prosecution of bad actors. By exploring case studies and jurisdictional challenges, the study underscores the need for clear legal standards to address transnational crypto-crimes effectively.