Privacy, security and public opinion
Dave Bird
dave at xemu.demon.co.uk
Wed, 7 Jun 2000 22:30:12 +0100
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
In article <007101bfcff4$1cce1160$3e0a989e@eloka>, Owen Lewis
<oml@eloka.demon.co.uk> writes
>> > Well, that's a view, firmly expressed. Do you know of any nation where
>it is
>> > plain that the standards you prescibe are applied and under what law is
>the
>> > prescription enforced?
>>
>> No. Not that it matters: I don't know of any nation with a zero murder
>> rate, either, but I still reserve the right to oppose murder.
>
>With respect, that does not address the point. You know many countries with
>laws expressly prohibiting murder under severe penalty. Which countries do
>you know that have laws expressly requiring the legislature (or the
>executive) to publish in full (and who is to judge whether they ever
>have?) their reasons for every piece of legislation, on penalty of having to
>withdraw the legislation if they do not do so?
The Council of Europe nations, who have signed up for the European
Convention on Human Rights: if a law restricts the basic rights
of those held to be in breach of it -- most do, surely? -- then it
must be shown necessary and proportionate, under the rule of law in
a civilised and tolerant country, to prevent a greater harm. So you
have to point to a real harm and show that nothing less would do to
prevent it. This generally amounts to publishing and justifying
the reasons for such a law. Under penalty of changing it to be
compliant if it is not so. Domestic and Strasbourg courts judge it.
- -- . ___ .
'-|:::|@\-[x]/__/| .-|:::|@\
||--|"" . |__|/ ||--|"" .
'-|:::|@\ (")"""-. .-|:::|@\ --+--.(")"""-'
|| |"" ||""| || |"" ' ' |""|
DEMOCRACY: two wolves & a lamb LIBERTY: a lamb with a kalashnikov
voting what's for lunch contesting the vote
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPsdk version 1.7.1
iQA/AwUBOT6+5H8v/Y5zkfRPEQIyeACaA5mShM1C87NOqOvD5fcLoZPW/ukAoOxg
Ha9EiRV0RCws5Z3EAWBU1ijk
=Wbzy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----