Related Keywords

No Related Keywords

Register NowHow It Works Need Essay Need Essay
There are many laws that have been imposed so that people don't misuse ICT. In this report I will explain some of these laws and talk about some good and bad points about each act and I will also describe each act that I have listed to the related reports which I have done earlier. I will try to show why these laws were introduced and what they do now to keep people from abusing these new technologies. Here is the list of legislations: "¢ Computer misuse act 1990 "¢ Health and safety regulations 1992 "¢ Regulation and investigatory powers act 2000 "¢ Data protection act 1998 Legislation for the personal report In this section I am going to demonstrate my knowledge of the legislation by describing it and explaining how it protects me. I will also explain what it does and does not do for me. The first report that I did earlier was based on my personal use of ICT. I explained about variety software. Those were included anything from homework to fun and games like: "¢ Email "¢ MSN "¢ Internet "¢ Microsoft word/excel/Access As I do my course works and also my homework on the computer I need to make sure they are safe enough because if anything goes wrong on my computer then it will lead to the loss of the data on the computer. The other reason for my needs on this legislation is that I personally feel unsafe about the things that I save on my computer as I think they may be accessed by unauthorised person and being hacked. So, as the hacking and stealing data was increasing there needed to be a legislation to prevent this happening, legislation were also created for the misuse of data and viruses as well. I think the most suitable legislation which most relates to an individual user could be computer misuse Act 1990. This act covers the misuse of the technology available to people. It includes things such as: "¢ Planting viruses on people's software to damage their computer and the files and documents it includes "¢ Software copying , where things such as games , DVDs and programs are illegally copied "¢ Using computer time to carry out unauthorised work "¢ Hacking into someone else's computer to see the files and documents it contains or to use their information However if someone did do one of the above by accident they wouldn't be charged. The person has to prove the above acts were taking place to commit an illegal act. Good points "¢ Hackers would be punished by being caught and will be stopped to try to hack again "¢ Viruses can be traced back to the person whose computer has been affected to discipline them in a suitable manner, causing them to give up on creating viruses Bad point "¢ The legislation cannot stop people trying all of the above , all it can do is persecute the person who does it In my own opinion I think this legislation could be improved by making the sentence for the persecutor longer or be totally banded from touching computers. The reason for this is because I personally use internet in every single thing that I do on my computer whether it is for fun or for my school work , therefore I wouldn't personally think I have enough information about the files which may contain viruses. In that point this legislation is provided to stop hackers, viruses and other things that may damage data that I am working on. This legislation meets my need in a lot of ways for instance unauthorised personnel are not allowed to access the files on my computer and also to not modify computer material. Sometimes the possibility of the files on my computer being hacked is quite high, because as I go on different websites I might not be aware of the things that might be attached to them therefore this legislation again protects data that has been saved on my computer. The main criminal offences with this act which affects not only me but the people as well are: hacking, the sending of viruses, and controlling the computer material, etc. Overall, I think this act protects me well because it puts off people from hacking and creating viruses due to the risk involved and again the really good point about this act is that hackers would be perturbed by being caught and will be stopped to try to hack again, however the legislation can not stop people from doing them, all it can do is persecute the person who does it. Improvement I think this legislation can be improved by making the sentence for the persecutor, or be totally banded from touching computers. Legislation for Person with special/particular needs report In my report which was based on Craig Headley, who is a pupil in my school, I talked about his needs and also how far each technology met his needs. People like Craig with special needs use a variety of specially adapted software including: "¢ Special keyboards "¢ switches or touch-screens designed for use by people with a wide range of limited mobility and physical difficulties "¢ Dictaphone, etc. As I talked about the safety and security reasons for Craig therefore as we'll as having things like mobile phone which gave Craig an extra security , but he also needed some protection acts to protect him against problems as he uses computer quite a lot to do his school work.I think the main legislation could be health and safety act. The employer is required by this act to: "¢ Look carefully at the work place where the employer works to see if there are any health and safety risks and correct them if there is. "¢ Plan work so that there are changes in activity or breaks. "¢ Arrange eye tests and provide glasses if they are needed. "¢ Provide employees with health and safety training However, under this act there should be regular inspection of the work place and equipment being used in the workplace. All employees should be trained in all aspects of health and safety. Work should be designed so that there are breaks between tasks or during tasks. Computer users should be provided with regular free eye tests and free glasses if needed. Good points "¢ If the employer has met all the health and safety requirements then he is less likely to be sued "¢ the employee is less likely to gain an injury that could affect their career in case they were to be sacked Bad points "¢ the employer has to spend money to meet the health and safety act requirements "¢ the employer can be sued if an employee has been injured on a problem that the employer could have fixed , but didn't in time for the injury The reason for my choice is that for someone like Craig who is unable to do his work on his own, it is vital that he feels safe about the environment that he works in. Craig's needs are mainly important in the school, because he does a lot of work on the computer as I explained in my report that he has mobility disability, therefore for the safety reasons this legislation meets his needs in an enormous way. As Craig attends school, therefore there is a variety of software which he can use confidently. Technology has so much to offer Craig due to the legislation is able to cope with varieties of special needs like: "¢ partially sighted "¢ Dyslexia "¢ Limited mobility "¢ Deaf people In Craig's case the school is responsible for the welfare of disable people to ensure that they are safe and are kept in good health. This legislation has got some other advantages. For instance as Craig has mobility problems therefore he will not be able to protect himself as much as a person who hasn't got that kind of problem, at this point I think this legislation is vital for Craig to protect him against other problems which he might face in the future, for instance in a work place. I think if this legislation was not introduced most companies would not pay out for the needs that the disable people need, and if Craig wanted to apply for any job therefore he would miss out on job opportunities. Over all people with special needs will thank this legislation as it provides them with the opportunity that they deserve. Improvement I think the punishments of the legislation are too high and should be lowered. I also think the employee should have to pay a percentage of the cost of their health and safety equipment. Legislation for local communities report In my local community there is a lot of software which are used by different places such as libraries, etc. In general all organisations use the same kind of software but related to their needs. The needs on legislation for my local community are quite important. For example in the libraries the security isn't that good as they can not put people on duty to control every single computer to find out what people are doing on the computer, and apart from that people wouldn't feel confident and may think their rights has been affected Therefore there needed to be a law which could protect the community against a lot of problems as the software's could face illegal operations. The pieces of software which is used in my local community are: "¢ Internet "¢ Printer "¢ Microsofts "¢ E-mail The legislation that I think applies to this is the regulation of investigatory powers Act 2000 that imposes a responsibility in a lot of areas. This legislation is an act that gives the government the power to see that what you are using the technology for. The main points are: "¢ The government can control your communicationsEmails, telephone calls, text messages, voice mail, etc "¢ They can target anyone in the hope of catching someone doing something illegal "¢ They can monitor person's use of the internet for any purpose "¢ They can demand that if you use encryption, you hand over the key so that they can see what you are doing. They don't have to make you aware that they are doing this. "¢ They can even pinpoint exactly where you are when you send a SMS or make a call on your mobile. The main job of this act on the local community is to give the government the right to spy on electronic communications and data. However, this legislation has also got some advantages and disadvantages like the other acts that talked about before. The main good point about this legislation is that if there is suspicion of illegal operations for instance in the Byker library then the government is allowed to spy on them so they can stop it straight away. The disadvantages could be that the government could be wasting their time looking at an organisation that hasn't done anything wrong, and most importantly this can effect personal privacy on the computer and actually breaking other legislation regulations. Improvement I think this legislation should only be able to spy on communications and data with more than just suspicion to make sure the organisations and the other places which work under some laws won't be affected in some ways. Legislation for an adult employment report The second report that I did was about Mr.Fardoust who worked for the O2 mobile company, he mostly uses things that is specified for his job, including: "¢ Internet "¢ E-mail "¢ PDA "¢ Laptop Mr.Fardoust needs greater cover as he normally sits at the computer most of the time. His needs are mostly related to his job and he needs to make sure that the data and the programmes that he stores on the computer are safe, as they are not only personal files, but also the customers and other people's private information. The legislation that applies to this is the data protection act that was created to stop other people using data that you have produced. The main purpose of this act is to prevent misuse of personal data. All organisations that hold personal data like the company which Mr. Fardoust works in, have to register its use. They also have to state what the information they have is and what they will use it for. If the information is wrong because of the lack of care when it was written, and has in some way damaged that person's rights, the person can complain about the company under this act. This legislation helps Mr.Fardoust in a lot of ways. For instance by referring to my report that I did earlier when Mr.fardoust uses the computer for his personal use and gives his credit card number to different websites for online shopping therefore he is well protected from hackers and they cannot extort any money than the initial fee that is to be paid by him. The company that Mr.Fardoust works in produces a lot of data's every single day about the customer's information and some other things about the company itself, therefore the legislation law protects the data's that Mr.Fardoust has produced which is very good for the company as they sometimes give their credit card out. However if Mr.Fardoust doesn't take care of the data access codes then the likes of unauthorized person or hackers that might the information is quite high or they can even extort money from credit card details without anyone knowing who it was. Good points "¢ If the file or a program is being copied the legislation can shut the illegal operation down "¢ If the act was not in place the cots of legal software would go up, as more money is need to stop people producing illegal software copyright Bad points "¢ The shutting down of illegal operations takes courts cases to settle the disagreements "¢ The legislation seems that they can not trace every one who copies things, as the number of people is increasing every day Improvement I think this legislation could be improved if as soon as the illegal operations have been found they should be shut down immediately and they should also consider what type of protection is needed for the type of data. So ,if the data is little important then it should only have little protection but for private details for instance in the company that Mr. Fardoust works in, as they have customers information on the computers then there should be a greater protection placed.
0 User(s) Rated!
Words: 2454 Views: 643 Comments: 0
There are many laws that have been imposed so that people don't misuse ICT. In this report I will explain some of these laws and talk about some good and bad points about each act and I will also describe each act that I have listed to the related reports which I have done earlier. I will try to show why these laws were introduced and what they do now to keep people from abusing these new technologies. Here is the list of legislations: • Computer misuse act 1990 • Health and safety regulations 1992 • Regulation and investigatory...
trace every one who copies things, as the number of people is increasing every day Improvement I think this legislation could be improved if as soon as the illegal operations have been found they should be shut down immediately and they should also consider what type of protection is needed for the type of data. So ,if the data is little important then it should only have little protection but for private details for instance in the company that Mr. Fardoust works in, as they have customers information on the computers then there should be a greater protection placed.
Become A Member Become a member to continue reading this essay orLoginLogin
View Comments Add Comment

The European Community has had a...The European Community has had a decidedly significant impact upon the legal systems of the Member States. It was established in 1957 by the Treaty of Rome, the main objectives being to develop stability throughout Europe by means of encouraging a closer union between member states. It has evolved a long way since having developed its own institutions and an autonomous legal system, with laws that bind each member state ultimately enabling it to regulate the rights and obligations of its members. It achieves this primarily through Treaties, a primary form of EC legislation that forms the basis of all other European Law. However the effect of EC treaties is unlike that of any other international agreement as the latter bind only states at an intergovernmental level and do not of themselves give rise to rights or interests which the citizens of the states can have enforced before their own national courts even if they are designed for the protection of individuals. Although the text of EC treaties do not indicate that their provisions will be any different, the ECJ has taken its own view as to the nature and effect of treaties known as the doctrine of 'direct effect.' This jurisprudential concept means that individuals are able to derive rights directly from community law, which can be enforced in their own national courts. It is a private species of enforcement, placing control in the hands of ordinary individuals as distinct from the public enforcement mechanism of community law as contained in Article 226 of the Treaty of Rome which enabled the Commission to bring proceedings against member states for breaches. This system was deficient in many ways as, not only was it unable to cope with the increasing work load and had insufficient remedies, it was political in nature. Direct effect, on the other hand, has allowed individuals to play a role and has potentially brought the community into the lives of every citizen. However despite its significance, it is important to put it into context of the many types of community law, not all of which entail direct effect or which can only be directly effective in certain circumstances, such as directives. The judicial foundations for direct effect were laid down in Van Gend En Loos 1963 a case which arose when the applicant was charged an import duty by Customs and Excise that had been increased to 8% in contravention of Article 12 of the EC treaty, which specified 3%. The question referred to the ECJ was whether Article 12 had direct effect i.e. did it confer rights upon individuals which they could enforce before their national courts. Strong submissions were made on behalf of the three governments that intervened in the case, holding that the ECJ had no right to decide whether EU prevailed over national law since this was a matter of national constitutional law. They also argued that the EC treaty was no different from any other international treaty creating obligations only between states and that the concept of direct effect would thus contradict the intentions of those who had created the treaty. However the ECJ rejected this line of reasoning holding that direct effect could in fact exist and thus individuals may have rights conferred upon them directly under EC treaties which may be applied against individuals' own state or each other. Their initial reasoning referred to a vision of the kind of legal system that it considered necessary to carry out the political and legislative programme that the treaties had set out to create "“ "a community not only of states but also of persons"¦that calls for the participation of everybody." They supported this by attempting to draw upon the text of the treaty, particularly the preamble, holding that it makes reference not only to governments but also individuals and thus is "more than a agreement which creates mutual obligations between the contracting states." In this sense it was distinct from other international treaties and constituted "a new legal order of international law for the benefit of which the stated have limited their sovereign rights, albeit within limited fields, the subjects of which comprise not only member states but also their nationals." Therefore they concluded that, "community law"¦is intended to confer upon individuals rights which become part of their legal heritage." This constituted a ground-breaking judgement which was not received with enthusiasm by all. The Advocate General, although accepting that certain treaty provisions could product direct effect, believed that Article 12 was not one of these, voicing concerns that to hold it directly effective could lead to a non-uniform application of that Article. He questioned whether "the authors intended to product the consequences of an uneven development of the law"¦.consequences which do not accord with an essential aim of the community." Certainly none of the textual evidence provided by the ECJ for direct effect was particularly strong and its teleological approach to interpretation, which involved it reading the text in such a way to determine the underlying aims of the community as a whole, is questionable. However the courts did impose some constraints on the doctrine, which otherwise has potentially far reaching implications. It recognised that there would most likely be practical limitations to the doctrine. For instance, if a provision is vague setting out a general aim which requires further implementation to be made clear then it would be difficult to accord direct effect to that provision and allow its direct application in a national court. Interpretations by different national courts would differ, thus undermining uniformity and it would lead to the usurpation of political authority by the courts. In view of such concerns and to introduce direct effect in a more restrained manner, the court in Van Gend set out criterion, outlining that a treaty provision will only have direct effect where it is clear and precise, establishes a negative unconditional obligation, it does not leave any meaningful discretion to member states and does not require further state action for its implementation. This did not, however, hinder the development of the doctrine as the ECJ showed little reluctance to relax the conditions laid down in Van Gend, allowing it to extend to other treaty articles as well as other community legislation, in addition to treaties, which has also been rendered capable of having direct effect by the ECJ. Other forms of community legislation are known as secondary sources and are set out in Article 249 which states that "in order to carry out their tasks the Council and the Commission shall, in accordance with the provisions of this treaty make regulations, issue directives and recommendations and deliver opinions." Regulations, the most common form of secondary legislation, are, according to Article 249 "binding in their entirety and directly applicable in all member states." Therefore since they become a part of the domestic law of the member state automatically and do not require further incorporation into national legislation, they confer rights upon individuals which can be relied on in their national courts. Certainly they appear to satisfy the Van Gend conditions for direct effect and unlike the situation concerning the direct effect of treaty provisions, there is strong textual evidence which provides for their direct enforceability. In Commission 'v' Italy 1973 the court emphatically confirmed the direct effect of regulations and criticised the attempts by member states to alter the requirements of a community regulation. However the position in relation to directives is more complex and highly controversial. Under Article 249 directives "bind any member state as to the result to be achieved while leaving domestic agencies competence as to form and means." They come in the form of instructions to member states to bring national law in line with the provisions of the directive with a specific date provided by which implementation must be assured. Therefore unlike regulations and most treaty provisions, directives do not come into force immediately but require incorporation into national law in order to come into effect. They ensure harmonization of laws in different member states and are considered more flexible as they provide states with discretion and some scope for national differences. Although eventual implementation need not be uniform in every member state, the actual aim must be properly secured and where it is not, this may constitute a breach. Considering this, it appears that the very nature of directives is incompatible with the notion of direct effect as laid down in Van Gend; it leaves some discretion to members states, it will require further state action for its implementation and it is likely that it will set out its term in general terms since it is merely a framework. However, once again, this failed to deter courts from considering whether directives may still give rise to direct effect and they expounded on this fundamental question through a line of important cases. In Van Duyn 'v' Home Office 1974 a Dutch national came to the UK to take up an offer of employment with the Church of Scientology but he was refused leave to enter the UK on account of this. She relied on among other provisions, Directive 64/221 which regulated the freedom of movement of workers within the community. The question that was referred to the ECJ was whether the provisions of the directive could have direct effect. The courts held that directives were indeed capable of being directly enforceable by an individual against a member state if they has not been implemented properly or at all. They contended that "it would be incompatible with the binding effect attributed to a directive by Article 249 to exclude the possibility that the obligation which it imposes may be invoked by those concerned." Therefore, this binding nature would be more effectively secured if they may "be invoked by individuals in the national courts." They went on to say that each provision must be examined in its context to determine whether it purpose is to grant rights to individuals and whether it is sufficiently clear and precise to be capable of being applied directly by a national court. In this case, the problem in relation to the directive was that it gave member states discretion to take measures restricting the movement of non-nationals on the grounds of public policy. However the court held that the exercise of this discretion was restricted by a provision of the directive, which imposed a clear precise obligation, and thus it was capable of being directly effective. Although the decisions was favourable from the perspective of individuals as they were able to invoke rights from a directive even if it had not been implemented, and from the perspective of the courts through their desire to make directives a more effective form of community law, generally it was not a popular one. In particular, some of the member states felt that the court had gone too far in advancing the conception since directives were intended to leave member states with some discretion as to the form and means and allowing by individuals to invoke rights directly from the directives this was undermined. The court, in response to such criticism, advanced their reasoning in Pubblico Ministerio 'v' Tullio Ratti 1980 in which the applicant was subjected to criminal proceedings under domestic legislation for breaching Italian legislation that had been implemented to effect the provisions of a directive but which was more stringent on the matter of the packaging of solvents. Therefore Ratti relied on his defence on the direct effect of the community directive, which led to a preliminary reference being made to the ECJ. To justify the direct enforceability of directives, the court put forward what has become known as the 'estoppel' argument. The reasoning follows that the state commits a wrong by not implementing a directive by the appropriate time or not implementing it properly and thus the they are estopped from refusing to recognise its binding effect in cases where it is pleaded against them by individuals relying on rights under that directive. The case also confirmed the position that individuals could only rely upon rights directly under the directive "at the end of the prescribed period and in the event of a the member states default," at which point the member state forfeits any discretion they were given and the directive becomes directly effective. The direct effect of directives was not, however, afforded 'free reign' and the courts achieved some measure of constraint through the concepts of vertical and horizontal effect. Van Duyn and Ratti affirmed that directives only have vertical effect so that an individual who is adversely affected by the states failure to implement a directive properly or at all only has rights against the state and not against a non-state entity or other individuals as the directive imposes the obligation of implementation upon the state. Therefore a 'horizontal' limitation was placed upon the scope of the direct effect of directives. This principle was addressed in Marshall 'v' Southampton and South West Hampshire Health Authority 1986 in which the applicant who was employed by the Health authority, was required to retire at 62 when men doing the same work did not have to retire until 65. Although under national law, by virtue of the Sex Discrimination Act, this was not discriminatory, she succeeded in he claim for unfair dismissal by relying on the Equal Treatment directive, which had not been implemented in the UK. The directive was sufficiently clear to have direct effect but the courts took the opportunity to confirm that, "that a directive may not of itself impose obligations on an individual and that a provision may not be relied upon as such against such a person." Therefore since the health authority were an 'organ of the state,' the directive had vertical direct effect. The court also addressed the issue of horizontal effect and the reason they offered for not according full direct effect to directives appeared to be textual. They argued that directives were not capable of having horizontal direct effect as in accordance with Article 249, "the binding nature of a directive "¦exists only in relation to 'each member state to which it is addressed' and thus since it does not address individuals it cannot be binding upon them. The argument is in reality not strong as it appears that the phrase from Article 249 seeks to distinguish between different member states and not between individuals and member states as the court assumed. Furthermore such close textual analysis has not been effective in other contexts, for instance, Treaty Articles, such as Article 119, are also explicitly addressed to the member states yet the courts have failed to elaborate on this aspect with regards to their direct effect and allowed their direct application to individuals as well as the state. The reasoning offered by the Advocate General in this case, with regards to horizontal direct effect, was perhaps more credible. He believed that that to accord horizontal direct effect to directives would, primarily "totally blur the distinction between regulations and directives" and secondly, perpetuate uncertainty, as there is no formal obligation for their publication within the Official Journal. His latter argument was a 'rule of law' concern, that since directives did not have to be published, individuals might not have been aware of certain obligations under directives. However since the Maastricht Treaty there is now an obligation to publish so that, to some extent, this problem has now been alleviated. Since Marshall, the position has been confirmed by subsequent case law and in Duke 'v' GEC Reliance 1988 Mrs Duke was unable to rely upon the Equal Treatment Directive, as Mrs Marshall had, as her employer was a private individual. Similarly in Paola Faccini Dori 'v' Recreb srl 1994 the Italian Govt had failed to implement a directive in respect of consumer rights to cancel certain contracts negotiated away from business premises. Dori having concluded a contract at a railway station was unable to rely on the directive to claim a right of cancellation as, although it was sufficiently clear, the court refused to extend the concept of direct effect "to the sphere of relations between individuals." Clearly, as, member states argued, such decision illustrate "an unfair distinction between the rights of state employees and those of private employees," but the court firmly held that "such a distinction may easily be avoided if the member state concerned has correctly implemented the directive into national law." However this problem regarding the 'horizontal' limitation on the scope of directives which means that they are not directly effective in all circumstances, has somewhat been alleviated with the courts developing a number of other measures through which directives can have legal effect in member states, enhancing their domestic application. Primarily, the courts have expanded the definition of 'state' against which directives can be enforced. In Marshall it was accepted that individuals could rely on rights set out in the directive against health authority as it could be regarded as an "organ of the state." However the question of what constituted the 'state' was left largely unanswered with little guidance on what entities could be properly classified as 'organs' of the state with the Advocate General suggesting that this was a matter for each member state to determine. The issue was somewhat clarified in Foster 'v' British Gas 1990 in which the 'state' was defined as any "organisation or body subject to the authority or control of the State or had special powers beyond those which result from the normal rules applicable between individuals." The court specified this as including "tax authorities, local or regional authorities, constitutionally independent authorities responsible for the maintenance of public order/safety and public authorities providing health service." In accordance with this the court considered a company in the position of British Gas to be an organ of the state. Clearly this has significantly broadened the definition of state since Marshall and critics have argued that this undesirable in the sense that 'state' should be a body which has the power to effect the implementation of a directive and rights should only be invoked against them as they are the ones under the obligation. Local authorities and nationalised industries such as British Gas do not have such power and cannot even affect the states decision on how and when to implement directives. In respect of this, the position laid down in Marshall regarding horizontal effect is undermined as individuals are able to enforce rights against bodies who would in any other context be non-state entities. Similarly the effectiveness of non-implemented or mis implemented directives that do not have direct effect through the horizontal limitation, has been enhanced through the doctrine of 'indirect effect', which emerged from Von Colson 1986. In this case the ECJ held that "national courts are required to interpret their national law in light of the wording and the purpose of the directive" so that the directive is given some effect despite the absence of proper domestic implementation. This principle may be used in two circumstances; firstly where the defendant is a state entity but a directive is not vertically directly effective as its provision are insufficiently imprecise, conditional and/or require further state action for their implementation. Secondly the provisions of a directive could be indirectly enforced against a non-state entity i.e. it could apply horizontally as between individuals. The court was confronted with a 'horizontal' situation in Marleasing 1990 in which this position was confirmed. Therefore, if national law was in existence that could be read in conformity with a non-implemented directive, then an individual could enforce a legal remedy against another individual through the interpretative route without seeking to enforce the directive directly and encountering the barrier to horizontal effect. This clearly provides an alternative way in which directives can have legal effect in member states. However Marleasing also addressed the issue of the possible limits to this interpretation principle. The Advocate General's opinion suggested that although this is essentially a matter to be resolved in relation to national principles of interpretation, when interpreting national law in light of a directive, the general principles of community law must still be respected, particularly the principles of legal certainty and non-retroactivity. Therefore an interpretation that would impose a 'civil penalty' upon one of the parties, for instance, would contravene these principles so that harmonious interpretation would not be possible. However beyond this the ECJ has subsequently left it to the discretion of the national court as to whether or not an interpretation in conformity with a directive is possible. There are certainly drawbacks to such an approach even though it enhances the effectiveness of domestic application of directives, the principle problem for courts being how far they are able to stretch national legislation, short of redrafting it, so that it can be interpreted in conformity with the provisions of a directive. It can essentially be seen as usurpation of the legislatures power as well as undermining the precision and certainty of the law. Furthermore it detracts from the credibility of the courts contention that directives cannot be afforded horizontal direct effect when this can now be affected indirectly through this interpretative route. However the courts have certainly moved away from the initial strong mandatory obligation and have dissuaded national courts from seeking harmonious interpretation where the end result may be seen as a form of horizontal direct effect. This was addressed in Luciano Arcaro 1996 in which a limitation was imposed based upon the possible impact of the interpretation. It was held that the EC does not require national law to be read in light of a directive where to do so would be "to impose on an individual an obligation contained in a directive which has not been transposed." However in practice, where there is a dispute between two parties where one is seeking an interpretation of in light of the directive and the other is resisting it, interpretation in conformity with a directive will usually entail a legal disadvantage for one of the parties. The final manner, in which it is possible for an individual to enforce a directive when the barrier to horizontal direct effect is encountered, was established in Francovich 1991 in which it was declared that member states may be liable to make good damage for its failure to implement a directive. Therefore, rather than enforcing rights against the state through direct effect, an individual can instead choose to bring proceedings for damages against the state if they have been adversely affected by the failure to implement. This has since been extended beyond failure to implement directives to cover any breach of community law by a member state. The method is highly desirable as it not only provides an incentive for member states to implement directives before the expiry of the time limit for implementation and discourages laxness, it also offers individuals financial relief. The doctrine of 'direct effect' has clearly had a significant impact on the legal systems of all member states, providing a means for individuals to enforce rights derived from community legislation in their own national courts and in this sense can be considered a liberating concept, if not an 'ideal.' However, the position, particularly with regards to directives, remains complex and even highly volatile, undermining to some extent the certainty and effectiveness of community legislation that the concept set out to achieve. It is this question of 'when and to what extent' directives are directly effective that the jurisprudence of the ECJ has persistently confused and failed to answer with any degree of certainty. Directives appear to be vertically directly effective with horizontal limitations but this is a position that has been undermined with the expansive definition of state and the concept of indirect effect which provide another means for directives to be given legal effect within member states without having to encounter the restrictive conditions of direct effect. However the exact scope of this also remains unclear so that ultimately there is a situation where individuals no longer are aware precisely what the law is, undermining the rule of law. However despite this, it is important to place the doctrine in context, as although it is certainly a significant feature of the EC, the ECJ does lack jurisdiction over some areas of community law and therefore cannot determine the legal effect and nature of certain provisions. Furthermore the political and legal environment in which the community operates is highly dynamic and it is likely that other means of legal enforcement may become as important.   

The European Community has had a decidedly significant impact upon the legal systems of the Member States. It was established in 1957 by the Treaty of Rome, the main objectives being to develop stability throughout Europe by means of encouraging a closer union between member states. It has evolved a...

Words: 4127 View(s): 478 Comment(s): 0
I agree that human rights do...I agree that human rights do not lend themselves to neat formulae. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights UDHR aims at guarding the interest of people residing in different countries. However, the political and cultural environment of a country would shape these rights. Some of the rights the essay would be discussing are the equality of the sexes, right to freedom of speech and education. Contrary to the West, women in Asia are often exploited and deprived of their rights in many areas, particularly in employment. This phenomenon can be attributed to the tradition and cultural differences between the two. Despite the influence of the west brought about by industrialization, the Asian Society is still rather conservative and very much in touch with the teachings of Confucius. Even till today, they are unable to completely abandon the concept of women being the weaker sex. Although the UDHR proclaims, "Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work." UN, 1948, Article 23 2, it is not uncommon to hear that women are paid lower than men are. Women accept the fact that they are weaker as compared to men in terms of work in this male dominated society. They are taught to be submissive and regard their family as the top most priority in their childhood. Moreover, employers believe that women are home bounded and contributions to t! he company would be minimal as they work fewer days, in comparison to men, due to the entitlement of their maternity leaves. In the eyes of the west, this would be a violation of human rights but to an Asian, a cultural difference. "Everyone has the right to education." UN, 1948, Article 26 1 does not hold in Asian context. Every American child is endowing with the right of education but receiving education is a form of luxury to the unfortunate Asian children. Most Asian countries are agricultural based and children are view as helping hands in the fields. Hence, children below the age of ten are often seen helping in the fields. Agrarian societies are generally poor parents are more concern with earning enough money to feed the family than paying for their children"s education. Although the United Nations emphasize the importance of education and stress that "Education shall be free,"¦" UN, 1948, these countries have no means of providing education as a free good. Families that are better off would send only the males to school, as they believe that males have to provide for the family in future. Girls are thought to be a burden to the family and would eventually marry off, hence, educating them ! would not be economical to the family. The US is able to provide free education because of its strong economic foundation after years of development. Hence, it would not be fair to accuse the east of being a violator of rights for not providing education as a public good to its people because they simply cannot afford it; education comes after development. This statement manifest in the following extract, "In the developed countries, universal primary education and literacy came after the process of development as well on its way." Kamla Bahsin, Literacy for Women, Why and How!. "Many governments are inclined to define human rights in the manner most convenient to suiting their own political interests." Boutros Butros Ghali, 1993. The definition to "freedom of speech" is highly debatable. The differences in political environment between Singapore and the US have cast different viewpoints on this contention. Singapore takes a firm stand in this issue and will hold the speaker responsible for what he declares. The government clamps down on remarks that promote civil unrest such as those of religious and racial issues. Many countries see this as under-mining of the UDHR but this restriction is necessary for the survival of Singapore. Without it, a multiracial society in Singapore would collapse and the consequences, civil unrest and eventually civil war. No doubt that countries are obliged to uphold the UDHR, certain diversities should be tolerated as most countries are "endowed with ancient and sophisticated cultures" Alatas, 1993 which may differ from one another. Thus, the international community must take into consideration the country"s traditions, social values and political environment before ostracizing them. In conclusion, I agree that human rights do not lend themselves to neat formulae and a pragmatic approach to it is necessary.   

I agree that human rights do not lend themselves to neat formulae. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights UDHR aims at guarding the interest of people residing in different countries. However, the political and cultural environment of a country would shape these rights. Some of the rights the essay would...

Words: 740 View(s): 350 Comment(s): 0