DOCSLIB.ORG

JUDICIAL EDUCATION and TRAINING Journal of the International Organization for Judicial Training

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
JUDICIAL EDUCATION and TRAINING Journal of the International Organization for Judicial Training and Training Issue 4 2015 JUDICIAL EDUCATION AND TRAINING Journal of the International Organization for Judicial Training MISSION The journal Judicial Education and Training publishes topical articles on the education and training of judges and justice sector professionals around the world. This journal aims to stimulate a community of learning in judicial education by showcasing selected papers presented to the biennial conferences of the International Organization for Judicial Training (IOJT). Additionally, it solicits original research, practical experience, and critical analysis on issues and trends in judicial education. It also provides a medium for informed discussion, the exchange of professional experience, and the development of knowledge in judicial education for a global readership. Contributions are invited from chief justices and senior judges, judicial educators and academic researchers with an interest in this field. Earlier issues of this online journal may be found at: http://www.iojt.org/journal/page~journal.html. JUDICIAL EDUCATION AND TRAINING Journal of the International Organization for Judicial Training 2015 JUDICIAL EDUCATION AND TRAINING Journal of the International Organization for Judicial Training Editor-in-Chief Prof. Amnon Carmi Editor Dr. Livingston Armytage Associate Editors Amy McDowell, Charles Campbell Editorial Board Judge Nikolay Angelov, Bulgaria; Dr. Livingston Armytage, Australia; Prof. Amnon Carmi, Israel; Judge (Ret.) Tony Cotter, USA; Judge Stephanie Domitrovich, USA; Judge Ives Gandra, Brazil; Justice Susan Glazebrook, New Zealand; Judge Victor Hall, UK; Justice Thea Herman, Canada; Justice Georgina Jackson, Canada; Judge Yigal Mersel, Israel; Judge Yvonne Murphy, Ireland; Justice Sam Rugege, Rwanda; Justice Lynn Smith, Canada Team of Editors – Referees Judge Nikolay Angelov, Dr. Livingston Armytage, Judge (Ret.) Tony Cotter, Justice Ives Gandra, Justice Susan Glazebrook, Judge Victor Hall, Justice Georgina Jackson, Justice Sam Rugege, Justice Lynn Smith Language Editors Judge Nikolay Angelov, Judge (Ret.) Tony Cotter, Justice Susan Glazebrook, Dr. Livingston Armytage Steering Committee Judge (Ret.) Tony Cotter, Judge Victor Hall, Justice Susan Glazebrook, Judge Yvonne Murphy, Dr. Livingston Armytage, Justice Lynn Smith September 2015 Manuscripts should be submitted to the editor: [email protected] Copyright 2015 National Center for State Courts 300 Newport Avenue Williamsburg, VA 23185-4147 Web site: www.ncsc.org ISBN: 978-0-89656-300-1 JUDICIAL EDUCATION AND TRAINING Journal of the International Organization for Judicial Training CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1 Livingston Armytage THE NATIONAL JUDICIAL COLLEGE APPROACH TO DISTANCE LEARNING : 9 TOWARDS A MODEL OF BEST PRACTICE William J. Brunson and Joseph R. Sawyer ONLINE PROGRAMMING AT THE NATIONAL JUDICIAL INSTITUTE 21 Thomas Crabtree, Joseph W. Bovard, and Magdalena Serwin JUDICIAL EDUCATION : T HE SINGAPORE BRAND 32 Boon Heng Tan CONTINUING JUDICIAL EDUCATION IN PAKISTAN 43 Faqir Hussain THE NEPALI PERSPECTIVE ON JUDICIAL EDUCATION : A B RIEF REVIEW 56 Shreekrishna Mulmi THE CHALLENGES OF CAPACITY BUILDING IN JUDICIAL -T RAINING INSTITUTIONS — 66 THE KOSOVO EXPERIENCE Charles A. Ericksen and Lavdim Krasniqi JUDICIAL TRAINING ON ELECTION DISPUTE RESOLUTION 74 Cheselden George V. Carmona TEACHING NEW JUDGES WHAT IT MEANS TO “B E” A JUDGE 82 Diane E. Cowdrey BENCH BOOKS : K EY PUBLISHING GUIDELINES 91 Livingston Armytage CRAFTING JUDGE -L ED JUDICIAL EDUCATION : P ARTNERING WITH EDUCATORS 107 T. Brettel Dawson JOINT INITIAL AND CONTINUOUS TRAINING FOR JUDGES AND LAWYERS IN THE FRAMEWORK 115 OF THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE AND ACCORDING TO THE GREEK LEGAL ORDER Petros Alikakos THE TRAINING OF JUDGES IN POLAND : T HE RECENT DEVELOPMENTS 122 Piotr Mikuli INTRODUCTION BY LIVINGSTON ARMYTAGE, EDITOR* Welcome back! In coming weeks, many readers will be preparing to attend IOJT’s 7th International Conference on the Training of the Judiciary in Recife, Brazil. The con- ference agenda promises many topics of interest in the pursuit of excellence in judicial education. So we trust that the articles published in this issue of Judicial Education and Training will excite interest in priming these preparations by raising matters of timely significance from around the world. In this issue, we are pleased to publish another informative and on occasion provocative collection of articles from Australia, Canada, Greece, Kosovo, Nepal, Pakistan, the Philippines, Poland, Singapore, and the United States. Our contributors address four themes: towards best practice in remote delivery of judicial education, a showcase of the diversity in South Asian approaches, further perspectives on core aspects of pedagogy, and more on the European experience. To open the issue, we present two leading articles on the increasingly topical theme of developing best practices in the remote delivery of judicial education. In the first, William Brunson and Joseph Sawyer of the National Judicial College, United States, outline the college’s approach to distance learning over the past 15 years. The authors begin by explaining key concepts and methods of remote delivery, sometimes also known as “web-based” or “online” learning, for judges. They emphasize that “the objective of investing time and money in distance learning was never to supplant face- to-face education. Rather, the goal was to expand NJC course offerings to reach judges who did not have the opportunity to engage in face-to-face education due to their busy court dockets, court culture, or financial constraints” (emphasis added). They present seven best practices gleaned from experience, which include staying engaged with the learner, punctuating courses by offering “spring breaks,” ensuring to provide adequate technical support, selecting the right faculty members and supporting them in adult learning, revamping online courses, and staying focused on content rather than the delivery process. Citing growing recognition of the learning effectiveness of online education, they note that it also offers greater convenience and provides the learner with opportunities to develop projects and deliver presentations to their online class- mates that might not be available in traditional courses owing to time constraints. Finally, they report that all of the tried-and-tested practices of sound adult learning apply equally in this new realm of distance learning. * Livingston Armytage is the Director of the Centre for Judicial Studies in Sydney, Australia; www.educatingjudges.com; e-mail: [email protected]. 2 INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR JUDICIAL TRAINING In a companion piece, Chief Judge Thomas Crabtree, Justice Joseph W. Bovard, and Ms. Magdalena Serwin of the National Judicial Institute (NJI) explain the Canadian experience in designing and developing online courses for judicial learn- ers. The institute pioneered its first online program in 1999 and now offers a number of courses over several weeks. The authors explain how online programming has con- tributed to the NJI’s judicial education plan—complementing in-person programs with online programs to deliver timely materials in a cost-effective manner. They highlight the advantages of online learning, which include timeliness, convenience, and community building. They also document some of challenges, for example, that some topics are better suited to online programming than others, just as some judges are less comfortable than others with technology. On balance, they argue that distance learn- ing “holds enormous promise for accessibility to judicial education when done right,” and for this reason the institute is continuing to work on a number of initiatives, which include a self-study online program and an online faculty development course. In light of the positive feedback received from their judiciary over the years, the authors encourage other jurisdictions to assess their educational needs and contemplate seriously how an online judicial education program can help them to support the steady inflow of ever more computer-literate judges. The second theme showcases the diversity of emerging experiences of judicial education across Asia. Judge Boon Heng Tan, who is executive director of the newly established Judicial College, contributes an article on the Singaporean approach to intro- ducing judicial education. He frames the article with his own sceptical question: “Can a small judiciary of less than 200 judges nationwide ever require a judicial college?” After just six months, he describes himself as being a “complete convert” on the critical role of judicial education and much excited by its vast potential. The college was established in late 2014 to support judges operating in an ever-changing environment to serve court users who are increasingly sophisticated and hold higher expectations of the courts to resolve complex disputes often involving interdisciplinary issues and transborder transactions. The author outlines the experience of establishing the college, installing the governance structure, and starting operations. These opera- tions are divided into a “Local Wing,” which provides induction and continuing education with a curriculum structured in four areas: “Bench Skills,” “Legal Development,” “Judicial Ethics,” and “Social Awareness.” There is also an “International Wing” that will support judges from other jurisdictions from across the region. The col- lege is mandated to conduct research to address local needs on which to develop new programs. At present,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Advancing Justice: Expanding the Possibilities State Courts | Annual Report 2017 One Judiciary
    ADVANCING JUSTICE: EXPANDING THE POSSIBILITIES STATE COURTS | ANNUAL REPORT 2017 ONE JUDICIARY ANNUAL REPORT 2017 SHARED VISION Inspiring public trust and confidence through an effective and accessible justice system MISSION Serving society with quality judgments, timely dispute resolution and excellent court services CORE VALUES Fairness Accessibility Independence, Integrity, Impartiality Responsiveness CONTENTS Foreword by The Honourable the Chief Justice 6 Message from the Presiding Judge 8 Organisation Chart 10 ADVANCING JUSTICE: EXPANDING THE POSSIBILITIES 11 Workplan 2017 Initiatives 12 ICMS for Accused Persons 13 Victim Assistance Scheme 13 Guidebook for Accused-in-Person 14 Updated Publications on Personal Injury and Fatal or Motor Accident Cases 14 Employment Claims Tribunals 15 Community Justice and Tribunals System & Short Mediation and Hearing 15 On-site Psychological Services 16 Family-connect @ State Courts 16 State Courts-NUS Clerkship Programme 17 Executive Leadership Programme for Court and Tribunal Administrators 18 IFCE: State Courts of Singapore Model 18 A Day in Court 19 Public Talk on Resolving Employment Disputes 19 Sentencing Conference 2017 20 State Courts Towers Progress 21 INSPIRING PUBLIC TRUST AND CONFIDENCE 23 Dashboard 24 Caseload Profile 25 Significant Cases: Criminal Justice Division 27 Significant Cases: Civil Justice Division 28 Significant Cases: Community Justice and Tribunals Division 29 Significant Cases: State Courts Centre for Dispute Resolution 30 Organisational Excellence 31 Service Excellence 32 Results of State Courts Surveys 33 Local Awards and International Profile 34 Visits by Distinguished Guests 36 OUR PEOPLE 37 Nurturing Our People 39 Staff Engagement: State Courts Conversation 2020 40 Our People: 2017 41 OUR VOLUNTEERS 42 Working Hand-in-Hand 43 GIVING BACK TO SOCIETY 44 Giving Back to Society 45 ANNUAL REPORT 2017 6 STATE COURTS, SINGAPORE 2017 was a significant year for the Courts as we took FOREWORD steps to respond to global trends in technology and globalisation.
    [Show full text]
  • OPENING of the LEGAL YEAR 2021 Speech by Attorney-General
    OPENING OF THE LEGAL YEAR 2021 Speech by Attorney-General, Mr Lucien Wong, S.C. 11 January 2021 May it please Your Honours, Chief Justice, Justices of the Court of Appeal, Judges of the Appellate Division, Judges and Judicial Commissioners, Introduction 1. The past year has been an extremely trying one for the country, and no less for my Chambers. It has been a real test of our fortitude, our commitment to defend and advance Singapore’s interests, and our ability to adapt to unforeseen difficulties brought about by the COVID-19 virus. I am very proud of the good work my Chambers has done over the past year, which I will share with you in the course of my speech. I also acknowledge that the past year has shown that we have some room to grow and improve. I will outline the measures we have undertaken as an institution to address issues which we faced and ensure that we meet the highest standards of excellence, fairness and integrity in the years to come. 2. My speech this morning is in three parts. First, I will talk about the critical legal support which we provided to the Government throughout the COVID-19 crisis. Second, I will discuss some initiatives we have embarked on to future-proof the organisation and to deal with the challenges which we faced this past year, including digitalisation and workforce changes. Finally, I will share my reflections about the role we play in the criminal justice system and what I consider to be our grave and solemn duty as prosecutors.
    [Show full text]
  • 146435NCJRS.Pdf
    If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. • BASIC COURSE INSTRUCTOR· UNIT GUIDE c 7 ) ~___________ C_R_IM_E_S __ A_G_A_IN_S_T_P_E_R_S_O_N_S ___________) (November 1~ l L1 6435 U.S. Department of Justice National Institute of JU!~tice This document has been reproduced exactly as received from the person or organization originating it. Points of view or opinions stated in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the National Institute of Justice. Permission to reproduce this copyrighted material has been grantedcaliforTIla by. Camm1SS10n•• on p eace - Offlcer StandardS ana: Tf'alning to the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS). Further reproduction outside of the NCJRS system requires permission of the copyright owner . • ---~------;----------.----~ - ------ - ------ • The curricula contained in this document is designed as a guideline for the delivery of performance-based law enforcement training. It is part of the POST Basic Course guidelines system developed by California law enforcement trainers and criminal justice educators in cooperation with the California • Commission on Peace Officer Sandards and Training . • ,, ,. II UNIT GUIDE 7 :: • TABLE OF CONTENTS LEARNING DOMAIN 7 Crimes Against Persons Page Knowledge Test 7 (POSTRAC) 3.10.1 Extortion ...................................... 1 3.17." Assault 3 3.17.2 Battery 5 3.18.1 Assault \I\Iith a Deadly Weapon .. 7 3.19.1 Mayhem ....................................... 9 3.20.1 Inflicting Corporal Injury Upon a Spouse, etc. ............ 11 3.23.6 Terrorism (Hate Crime) ............................ 13 3.25.1 Robbery ....................................... 17 • 3.26.1 Kidnapping or False Imprisonment .................... 21 3.27.1 Aiding or Encouraging a Suicide .
    [Show full text]
  • 3668212B-95De-4Ea1-9934
    THE STATUTES OF THE REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE CORRUPTION, DRUG TRAFFICKING AND OTHER SERIOUS CRIMES (CONFISCATION OF BENEFITS) ACT (CHAPTER 65A) (Original Enactment: Act 29 of 1992) REVISED EDITION 2000 (1st July 2000) Prepared and Published by THE LAW REVISION COMMISSION UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE REVISED EDITION OF THE LAWS ACT (CHAPTER 275) Informal Consolidation – version in force from 2/1/2021 CHAPTER 65A 2000 Ed. Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I PRELIMINARY Section 1. Short title 2. Interpretation 2A. Meaning of “item subject to legal privilege” 3. Application 3A. Suspicious Transaction Reporting Office PART II CONFISCATION OF BENEFITS OF DRUG DEALING OR CRIMINAL CONDUCT 4. Confiscation orders 5. Confiscation orders for benefits derived from criminal conduct 5A. Confiscation order unaffected by confiscation order under Organised Crime Act 2015 6. Live video or live television links 7. Assessing benefits of drug dealing 8. Assessing benefits derived from criminal conduct 9. Statements relating to drug dealing or criminal conduct 10. Amount to be recovered under confiscation order 11. Interest on sums unpaid under confiscation order 12. Definition of principal terms used 13. Protection of rights of third party PART III ENFORCEMENT, ETC., OF CONFISCATION ORDERS 14. Application of procedure for enforcing fines 1 Informal Consolidation – version in force from 2/1/2021 Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes 2000 Ed. (Confiscation of Benefits) CAP. 65A 2 Section 15. Cases in which restraint orders and charging orders may be made 16. Restraint orders 17. Charging orders in respect of land, capital markets products, etc.
    [Show full text]
  • Report on Judicial Independence and Impartiality of in the Council Of
    CCJE-BU(2017)11 Strasbourg, 7 February 2018 BUREAU OF THE CONSULTATIVE COUNCIL OF EUROPEAN JUDGES (CCJE) Report on judicial independence and impartiality in the Council of Europe member States in 2017 Prepared by the Bureau of the CCJE following the proposal of the Secretary General of the Council of Europe 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS List of abbreviations...............................................................................................................3 I. Introduction: scope, purpose and limitations of the report ............................................4 II. Overview of relevant European standards.......................................................................6 A. Functional independence: appointment and security of tenure of judges ..................6 B. Organisational independence: Councils for the Judiciary and the administration of courts.......................................................................................................................................7 C. Impartiality of judges, codes of ethics and professional conduct and disciplinary measures.................................................................................................................................9 D. The economic basis for the smooth functioning of the judicial system ....................10 E. Judges and media: public discussion and criticism of judges ...................................11 III. General issues concerning judicial independence and impartiality...........................13 IV. Country specific issues concerning
    [Show full text]
  • Members of the Court of Justice of the European Union
    Members of the Court of Justice of the European Union Caption: Curricula vitae of the Members of the Court of Justice of the European Union. Source: Court of Justice of the European Union. Court of Justice. Members. Presentation of the Members. [ON-LINE]. [Luxembourg]: Court of Justice of the European Union, [21.10.2010]. Disponible sur http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/jcms/Jo2_7026/. Copyright: (c) Court of Justice of the European Union URL: http://www.cvce.eu/obj/Members_of_the_Court_of_Justice_of_the_European_Union-en-8a53c934-14c5-40ee- bcca-a6da5d4457a5.html Publication date: 13/08/2011 1 / 10 13/08/2011 The Members of the Court of Justice of the European Union Name Curriculum vitae Vassilios Skouris Born in 1948; graduated in law from the Free University, Berlin (1970); awarded doctorate in constitutional and administrative law at Hamburg University (1973); Assistant Professor at Hamburg University (1972-77); Professor of Public Law at Bielefeld University (1978); Professor of Public Law at the University of Thessaloniki (1982); Minister of Internal Affairs (1989 and 1996); Member of the Administrative Board of the University of Crete (1983-87); Director of the Centre for International and European Economic Law, Thessaloniki (from 1997); President of the Greek Association for European Law (1992-94); Member of the Greek National Research Committee (1993-95); Member of the Higher Selection Board for Greek Civil Servants (1994-96); Member of the Academic Council of the Academy of European Law, Trier (from 1995); Member of the Administrative Board of the Greek National Judges' College (1995-96); Member of the Scientific Committee of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (1997-99); President of the Greek Economic and Social Council in 1998; Judge at the Court of Justice since 8 June 1999; President of the Court of Justice since 7 October 2003.
    [Show full text]
  • Cercle Des Présidents – the Circle of Presidents – Präsidenten-Runde – Круг Председателей
    LISTE DES PARTICIPANTS – LIST OF PARTICIPANTS – TEILNEHMERLISTE – CПИCOК УЧACTНИКОВ Cercle des Présidents – The Circle of Presidents – Präsidenten-Runde – Круг Председателей ALBANIE – ALBANIA – ALBANIEN – АЛБАНИЯ Bashkim DEDJA, President The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Albania Sokol BERBERI, Judge (Gjykata Kushtetuese e Republikës së Shqipërisë) ALLEMAGNE – GERMANY – DEUTSCHLAND – ГЕРМАНИЯ Prof. Andreas VOSSKUHLE, President The Federal Constitutional Court of Germany Peter WEIGL, Director (Bundesverfassungsgericht) ANDORRE – ANDORRA – ANDORRA – АНДОРРА Juan Antonio ORTEGA DÍAZ-AMBRONA, The Constitutional Tribunal of the Principality of Andorra President (Tribunal Constitucional del Principat d’Andorra) Rosa Maria RUIZ GUERRERO, Officer- Counsel ARMÉNIE – ARMENIA – ARMENIEN – АРМЕНИЯ Prof. Gagik HARUTYUNYAN, President The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Armenia Vladimir VARDANYAN, Head of (Конституционный Суд Республики Армения) International Treaty Department AUTRICHE – AUSTRIA – ÖSTERREICH – АВСТРИЯ Prof. Gerhart HOLZINGER, President The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Austria Brigitte BIERLEIN, Vice-President (Verfassungsgerichtshof der Republik Österreich) Prof. Christoph GRABENWARTER, Judge Britta ADAMOVICH-WAGNER, Secretary General Reinhild HUPPMANN, Chief of Protocol AZERBAÏDJAN – AZERBAIJAN – ASERBAIDSCHAN – Farhad ABDULLAYEV, President AЗEPБAЙДЖAН Rauf GULIYEV, Secretary General The Constitutional Court of the Azerbaijan Republic (Azerbaycan Respublikasinin Konstitusiya Mehkemesi) BELGIQUE – BELGIUM
    [Show full text]
  • Hybrid Constitutional Courts: Foreign Judges on National Constitutional Courts
    Hybrid Constitutional Courts: Foreign Judges on National Constitutional Courts ROSALIND DIXON* & VICKI JACKSON** Foreign judges play an important role in deciding constitutional cases in the appellate courts of a range of countries. Comparative constitutional scholars, however, have to date paid limited attention to the phenomenon of “hybrid” constitutional courts staffed by a mix of local and foreign judges. This Article ad- dresses this gap in comparative constitutional schol- arship by providing a general framework for under- standing the potential advantages and disadvantages of hybrid models of constitutional justice, as well as the factors likely to inform the trade-off between these competing factors. Building on prior work by the au- thors on “outsider” models of constitutional interpre- tation, it suggests that the hybrid constitutional mod- el’s attractiveness may depend on answers to the following questions: Why are foreign judges appoint- ed to constitutional courts—for what historical and functional reasons? What degree of local democratic support exists for their appointment? Who are the foreign judges, where are they from, what are their backgrounds, and what personal characteristics of wisdom and prudence do they possess? By what means are they appointed and paid, and how are their terms in office structured? How do the foreign judges approach their adjudicatory role? When do foreign * Professor of Law, UNSW Sydney. ** Thurgood Marshall Professor of Constitutional Law, Harvard Law School. The authors thank Anna Dziedzic, Mark Graber, Bert Huang, David Feldman, Heinz Klug, Andrew Li, Joseph Marko, Sir Anthony Mason, Will Partlett, Iddo Porat, Theunis Roux, Amelia Simpson, Scott Stephenson, Adrienne Stone, Mark Tushnet, and Simon Young for extremely helpful comments on prior versions of the paper, and Libby Bova, Alisha Jarwala, Amelia Loughland, Brigid McManus, Lachlan Peake, Andrew Roberts, and Melissa Vogt for outstanding research assistance.
    [Show full text]
  • Tan Eng Hong V Attorney-General
    Tan Eng Hong v Attorney-General [2013] SGHC 199 Case Number : Originating Summons No 994 of 2010 Decision Date : 02 October 2013 Tribunal/Court : High Court Coram : Quentin Loh J Counsel Name(s) : M Ravi (L F Violet Netto) for the plaintiff; Aedit Abdullah SC, Jeremy Yeo Shenglong and Sherlyn Neo Xiulin (Attorney-General's Chambers) for the defendant. Parties : Tan Eng Hong — Attorney-General Constitutional law – Equal protection of the law – Equality before the law Constitutional law – Fundamental liberties – Right to life and personal liberty Constitutional law – Constitution – Interpretation 2 October 2013 Judgment reserved. Quentin Loh J: Introduction 1 In these proceedings, Originating Summons No 994 of 2010 (“OS 994”), the plaintiff, Tan Eng Hong (“the Plaintiff”), seeks to challenge the constitutionality of s 377A of the Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) (“the Penal Code”) on the grounds that it infringes his rights to: (a) life and personal liberty; and (b) equality before the law and equal protection of the law under Arts 9(1) and 12(1) of the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore (1985 Rev Ed, 1999 Reprint) (“the Constitution”) respectively. These Articles will hereafter be referred to as “Art 9(1)” and “Art 12(1)” for short. 2 There are two earlier decisions which have a bearing on this case. The first, Tan Eng Hong v Attorney-General [2012] 4 SLR 476 (“Tan Eng Hong (Standing)”), is the Court of Appeal’s decision on a striking-out application earlier in the lifespan of these proceedings. The second, Lim Meng Suang and another v Attorney-General [2013] 3 SLR 118 (“Lim Meng Suang”), is my decision in another application concerning the constitutionality of s 377A where I held that s 377A was not inconsistent with Art 12(1).
    [Show full text]
  • Organised Crime Bill
    Organised Crime Bill Bill No. 21/2015. Read the first time on 13 July 2015. ORGANISED CRIME ACT 2015 (No. of 2015) ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART 1 PRELIMINARY Section 1. Short title and commencement 2. General interpretation 3. Meaning of “item subject to legal privilege” 4. Purpose of Act PART 2 ORGANISED CRIME OFFENCES 5. Locally-linked organised criminal group membership 6. Recruiting members for organised criminal group 7. Instructing commission of offence for organised criminal group 8. Procuring expenditure or application of property to support, aid or promote certain offences related to organised criminal group 9. Expending or applying property to support, aid or promote certain offences related to organised criminal group 10. Allowing organised criminal group to use premises 11. Receiving, retaining, etc., property of organised criminal group 12. Facilitation of commission of offence by organised criminal group 13. Commission of offence for organised criminal group 2 PART 3 ORGANISED CRIME PREVENTION ORDERS Division 1 — Preliminary Section 14. Interpretation of this Part and Parts 4 and 5 Division 2 — General 15. Organised crime prevention orders 16. Type of provision that may be made by organised crime prevention orders Division 3 — Duration and nature of OCPO 17. Duration of OCPO 18. Persons against whom OCPO may be made 19. Electronic monitoring of individual subject to OCPO 20. Compliance with orders: authorised monitors PART 4 FINANCIAL REPORTING ORDERS 21. Financial reporting order 22. Duration of FRO 23. Effect of financial reporting orders PART 5 GENERAL PROVISIONS RELATING TO OCPO AND FRO Division 1 — Enforcement 24. Powers of law enforcement officers to retain documents 25.
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of European Private Law Upon the Mixed Legal Systems of Cyprus
    Journal of Civil Law Studies Volume 12 Number 1 2019 Article 5 10-9-2019 The Impact of European Private Law Upon the Mixed Legal Systems of Cyprus Nicholas Mouttotos Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.lsu.edu/jcls Part of the Civil Law Commons Repository Citation Nicholas Mouttotos, The Impact of European Private Law Upon the Mixed Legal Systems of Cyprus, 12 J. Civ. L. Stud. (2019) Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.lsu.edu/jcls/vol12/iss1/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Reviews and Journals at LSU Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Civil Law Studies by an authorized editor of LSU Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE IMPACT OF EUROPEAN PRIVATE LAW UPON THE MIXED LEGAL SYSTEM OF CYPRUS Nicholas Mouttotos∗ I. Introduction ............................................................................... 96 II. Mixed Jurisdictions .................................................................. 98 A. Mixed Jurisdictions as a Model for Europe? ..................... 100 B. The Mixed Legal System of Cyprus .................................. 103 C. Historical Evolution ........................................................... 104 D. The Legal System .............................................................. 115 E. Contract and Commercial Law ........................................... 119 III. The Impact of EU Law ......................................................... 124 IV. Consumer Protection
    [Show full text]
  • Judiciary Times Issue No. 2 Sep 2020
    ISSUE 02 • SEPTEMBER 2020 ENSURING THE FAMILY JUSTICE MASS CALL 2020: CONTINUOUS COURTS LIVING UP TO THE DELIVERY OF JUSTICE WORKPLAN 2020 CALL IN A TIME OF PANDEMIC SEPTEMBER 2020 02 HIGHLIGHTS As not all litigants-in-person (LIPs) have access ENSURING THE to or are savvy users of video conferencing technologies, the Courts have set up video conferencing facilities in their premises HIGHLIGHTS for these LIPs to use. To minimise physical CONTINUOUS interactions, the State Courts and the Supreme Court have also set up a terminal at their Ensuring the Continuous Delivery of 01 information counter to assist court users who Justice DELIVERY OF have enquiries. When a court user activates the video-assistance feature on the terminal, Family Justice Courts Workplan 03 he will be connected to a service staff who will 2020: Today is a New Day JUSTICE attend to him remotely. Mass Call 2020: Living Up to the 04 While COVID-19 has transformed the way we live, work and Call in a Time of Pandemic interact, it has also presented new opportunities and inspired innovations in the Singapore Courts so that they can continue EVENTS & INITIATIVES to serve the public efficiently and effectively amidst the Providing a Safe Environment disruptions caused by the pandemic. The health and safety protocols that are in Video Conferencing in the Courts 05 place fortify the Courts’ efforts in maintaining the delivery of justice. Apart from keeping “Our experience up their enhanced cleaning regime for New Processes to Streamline 06 during the pandemic courtrooms and all common areas, safe Proceedings and Reduce Physical has yielded many management measures such as temperature Attendance in Court valuable lessons that screening at the entrance, and spaced-out we must now build seating arrangements in courtrooms and Family Justice Practice Forum 06 on to improve our common areas continue to be in place.
    [Show full text]