Thesis (M.S. in Joint Campaign Planning and Strategy)--Joint Forces Staff College, Joint Advanced Warfighting School, 2008. / Title from PDF title page; viewed on Oct. 28, 2008. "4 April 2008." Electronic version of original print document. Includes bibliographical references (p. 83-88).

In the period 2004-2007, the highest courts of Australia, the United Kingdom and Canada handed down judgments on the legality of the indefinite detention of non-citizens, specifically non-citizens subject to a removal order whose removal was frustrated. Each of the governments claimed that its intention to remove the non-citizens if and when it became viable to do so sufficed to establish that their detention fell within an ‘immigration’ exception to non-citizens’ rights. The cases thus raised fundamental questions about the relationship between non-citizens’ rights and governments’ power to control national borders. I argue that the indefinite detention of a non-citizen subject to a removal order is illegal. The detention of a non-citizen subject to a removal order is lawful if it can be justified as a proportionate measure to effect his or her removal. Indefinite detention fails this proportionality test and as such is an unlawful violation of a non-citizen’s rights. I develop my argument through case studies from the three jurisdictions. I argue that the law of all three jurisdictions contained ample resources to support a ruling that indefinite detention was unlawful. The question then arises as to why this view did not prevail in every jurisdiction. I demonstrate that, taking into account variations in legal frameworks and doctrines, a judge’s response to indefinite detention is at base determined by his or her answer to the question ‘does a non-citizen, against whom a valid removal order has been made, retain a right to liberty?’ The judge’s answer to this question flows through his or her adjudication on the scope of ‘immigration’ exceptions to legal protections of the personal liberty of non-citizens considered in the case studies. I consider the best justification for the view that a removal order revokes a non-citizen’s right to liberty, provided by John Finnis. I argue that it rests on questionable understandings of citizenship, and in operation inevitably undermines the values of community solidarity it seeks to promote.

In the period 2004-2007, the highest courts of Australia, the United Kingdom and Canada handed down judgments on the legality of the indefinite detention of non-citizens, specifically non-citizens subject to a removal order whose removal was frustrated. Each of the governments claimed that its intention to remove the non-citizens if and when it became viable to do so sufficed to establish that their detention fell within an ‘immigration’ exception to non-citizens’ rights. The cases thus raised fundamental questions about the relationship between non-citizens’ rights and governments’ power to control national borders. I argue that the indefinite detention of a non-citizen subject to a removal order is illegal. The detention of a non-citizen subject to a removal order is lawful if it can be justified as a proportionate measure to effect his or her removal. Indefinite detention fails this proportionality test and as such is an unlawful violation of a non-citizen’s rights. I develop my argument through case studies from the three jurisdictions. I argue that the law of all three jurisdictions contained ample resources to support a ruling that indefinite detention was unlawful. The question then arises as to why this view did not prevail in every jurisdiction. I demonstrate that, taking into account variations in legal frameworks and doctrines, a judge’s response to indefinite detention is at base determined by his or her answer to the question ‘does a non-citizen, against whom a valid removal order has been made, retain a right to liberty?’ The judge’s answer to this question flows through his or her adjudication on the scope of ‘immigration’ exceptions to legal protections of the personal liberty of non-citizens considered in the case studies. I consider the best justification for the view that a removal order revokes a non-citizen’s right to liberty, provided by John Finnis. I argue that it rests on questionable understandings of citizenship, and in operation inevitably undermines the values of community solidarity it seeks to promote.

The purpose of this essay is to analyze and determine if the National Security Law implemented in Hong Kong is in contradiction or in accordances with John Stuart Mill’s four grounds of free speech. What contradictions or accordances can be found between the law and the four grounds of free speech? The theoretical background for this essay consists of information about the relation between Hong Kong and China, the law and its contents, definition of the four grounds of free speech and the protection of free speech in other forms. A qualitative content analysis was done with the use of a systemic analysis to achieve the purpose. The findings where categorized according to the four grounds of free speech. The essay concludes that all the four grounds are contested. This is due to the law granting the government of Hong Kong and its various bodies additional power to control and supervise what is spoken and written. One instance of accordance was found between the law and the four grounds. Furthermore, the right to freedom of speech will diminish on various levels across the region of Hong Kong and the criminalization of an opinion has effectively been instated by the law.

University of Macau / Faculty of Law

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T20:24:19Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Rogerio Batista Gabbelini.pdf: 881576 bytes, checksum: 6eeab25bb7db1777889cdcd11c9ff8c2 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2016-03-09 / The theme of this thesis refers to the study of crime of terrorism in light of the Federal Constitution of 1988 with an analysis of the criminalization of express mandates provided for in Article 5, item XLIII which determines the criminal standard editing to typify the crime of terrorism. Composed of six chapters, it presents, in the first, brief study in international law with the various forms that presents terrorism. The second chapter, in turn, presents the criminal constitutional principles in the face of new criminal methods. The third chapter assesses the legal interests emphasizing the aspect of collective protection of these interests and under the perspective of constitutional interpretation, thus providing a correct interpretation of the criminal standard. The draft of the 2012 penal code transacts before the Senate House with classification proposal of terrorism crime in Articles 239, 240, 241 and 242 being what this is all about in the fourth chapter. The fifth chapter analyzes Law 7.170/83, called National Security Law and issued during the military period and its non-responsiveness to existing constitutional principles. The sixth chapter examines the terrorist crime of political boundaries under the aspect of international law, thus presenting the issues of religious and racial intolerance, setting so the consequent violations of the guarantees of fundamental civil rights / O tema desta dissertação refere-se ao estudo do delito de terrorismo à luz da Constituição Federal de 1988, a partir da análise dos mandados expressos de criminalização previstos no artigo 5º, XLIII, que determinam a edição de norma penal para tipificar o delito de terrorismo. Composta por oito capítulos, apresenta, após a Introdução, em seu segundo capítulo, um breve estudo de direito comparado, revelando as diversas formas pelas quais o terrorismo se apresenta. O terceiro capítulo, por sua vez, apresenta os princípios constitucionais penais diante das novas modalidades criminosas. Os bens jurídicos são avaliados no quarto capítulo, que enfatiza o aspecto de proteção coletiva desses bens e a perspectiva da interpretação constitucional, proporcionando assim uma correta interpretação da norma penal. O anteprojeto do código penal de 2012 tramita perante o Senado Federal com proposta de tipificação do delito de terrorismo em seus artigos 239, 240, 241 e 242; este é o assunto tratado no quinto capítulo desta pesquisa. O sexto analisa a Lei nº7.170/83, denominada Lei de Segurança Nacional, editada no período militar, e sua receptividade pelos princípios constitucionais vigentes. Por fim, antecedendo a Conclusão desta pesquisa, são examinadas, no sétimo capítulo, as delimitações políticas do delito de terrorismo sob o aspecto do direito comparado, a partir da análise de questões de intolerância religiosa e racial que configuram violações às garantias dos direitos civis fundamentais

The current study utilizes Critical Discourse Analysis and Thematic Analysis to study newspaper coverage of F.B.I. sting operations in The New York Times, Washington Post, and USA Today. F.B.I. sting operations are a modern counter-terrorism policy designed to preempt acts of terrorism. This study develops a theoretical approach to understanding F.B.I. sting operations by reviewing the critique of security. The critique of security suggests that nations construct threats in order to produce and maintain ideological and practical hegemony. Thematic categories of the newspaper discourse are formulated and analyzed in the context of security. The study employs aspects of grounded theory for theoretical positioning. Findings suggest newspaper coverage of F.B.I. sting operations reflect and expand security in a number of important ways. Newspaper coverage provides information on a significant tactic used in the War on Terrorism and gives insight to the justification and reasoning for using that tactic. These pieces of information explain the interplay of security and counter-terrorism policy. However, findings also suggest security fosters positive relationships between nations, which requires repositioning aspects of the critique of security developed previously. Finally, newspaper discourse of F.B.I. sting operations helps contextualize the way modern counter-terrorism policy is ideologically configured. Findings show the dominant ideological configuration is security. The study considers how this framework contributes to a flawed understanding of the nature of peace.

This study examines why Japan and Switzerland have chosen to keep the vocabulary of Article 9 and neutrality, respectively, and to reinterpret their definitions to suit their needs (policy reinterpretation), instead of simply abandoning the original policy and replacing it with a new, more suitably worded policy that clarifies the changing policy position of the government (policy abandonment). By analyzing the legal history of the overseas capabilities of the Japanese Self-Defense Forces and the Swiss Armed Forces, as well as the actions and influences of the government, political parties, and the public, this study finds the following trends. First, the government tends to refrain from policy abandonment either due to perceived public opposition or benefits in international negotiations. Second, party resistance is not an significantly influential factor in the choice of policy abandonment over policy reinterpretation. Finally, public opinion is influential, but self-contradictory; often supporting the change in policy (increased overseas capabilities of armed forces) but opposing the concept of policy abandonment due to high attachment to the respective policies of Article 9 and neutrality.

This thesis investigates how and why U.S. policies and agencies are ill-equipped to respond to narco-terrorism and offers some policy recommendations for remedying that. Narco-terrorism is the merging of terrorism and drug trafficking. Terrorist organizations and narcotics traffickers each have much to offer the other; there is potential for symbiosis in the form of cooperation and even hybridization. Examination of the dynamics between terrorist organizations and drug traffickers, combined with an evaluation of the US responses to narcoterrorism in Colombia and Afghanistan, makes it clear that current US policy responses fail to recognize narcoterrorism as a unique challenge, and instead attempt to deal separately with terrorism and drug trafficking. This approach has the potential to actually worsen both situations. The US needs a narcoterrorism strategy and institutions in place to implement it.

Cette thèse s’intéresse à la protection de la vie privée informationnelle dans le contexte de la biosécurité. La biosécurité se définit comme le processus qui vise à prendre en charge, dans une optique de sécurité nationale, les menaces et dangers que représentent les épidémies de maladies infectieuses pour la santé des populations humaines et la sécurité de l’État. Notre projet remet en question l’idée selon laquelle la conduite des activités de surveillance de la santé publique implique nécessairement une diminution de la protection offerte aux renseignements personnels sur la santé. Nos recherches tendent à démontrer que la conciliation de la surveillance de la santé et la protection de la vie privée est non seulement possible, mais qu’elle est surtout nécessaire. Nous portons plus précisément notre attention sur le cas de la collecte et de l’utilisation de renseignements dépersonnalisés sur la santé par les systèmes de surveillance syndromique. Bien calibrée et soigneusement réglementée, cette forme novatrice et particulière de surveillance offrirait le double avantage de réduire les risques d’atteintes à la vie privée des individus et d’augmenter de manière considérable l’efficacité des capacités étatiques en matière de détection des épidémies. / This thesis focuses on the protection of privacy in the context of biosecurity. Biosecurity is concerned with the threats that epidemics of infectious diseases present to public health and national security. The main goal of my thesis is to challenge the idea that conducting meaningful public health surveillance necessarily implies that the scope of the legal protection given to personal health information has to be reduced. My research demonstrates that, given certain conditions, a public health surveillance conducted with carefully configured syndromic surveillance systems operating with de-identified health data would increase both the efficiency of surveillance in terms of its capacity to detect emerging epidemics and the level of informational privacy of the patients.