Dear reader,

M. Simovart
{"title":"Dear reader,","authors":"M. Simovart","doi":"10.12697/ji.2023.32.00","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThis year’s Juridica International compendium offers\narticles on a wide variety of topics. From an initial glance, the problems\ntackled in those articles might not seem to have so much in common. Yet, even\nthough offering windows to several quite distinct cross-sections of legal\nscholarship, many of the pieces, upon a closer look, reveal themselves to be\nvery much interrelated. One notices that most of them share a theme of concern\narising from crises in society that have recently come to a head, with a\nleitmotif of concern for the future and of venturing into unknowns – a backdrop\nso familiar to us these days’ that we might not even recognise its peculiarity.\n\n\nContemporary times are\nmarked by complex global developments such as the pandemic, the ongoing\nwars in Ukraine and of Israel/Hamas, a still very much unwritten future of AI\ninfluencing all aspects of life, etc. In times such as these, the law assumes a\ncritical role in shaping not only our current doings but the course of human\naffairs far further down the line as well. \n\nThe corresponding concern for our global future can be\ncharacterised as underpinning this edition from its very first article, a paper\nwhereby Astrid Stadler calls on the courts to save the climate. The same focus\ncould be ascribed to the examination of sensitive health data’s application as\npresented from research by Maret Kruus and the analysis penned by Kai Härmand\nexamining AI’s impact on judicial action. Their scholarship silently invites us\nto ponder the profound influence that the judiciary and the legislature can\nhave on the future. Furthermore, the need to accommodate in the manner most\nbeneficial for society and for every individual alike seems to give significant\nimpetus for such research. The article by Jānis Neimanis on recent Latvian\nConstitutional Court case-law reflects concerns of a similar nature, via\nillustrations from the response to SARS-CoV-2, empowerment of marginalised\ngroups, and protection of democracy. \n\nWhile the work of Neimanis demonstrates how legal response\nmay manifest a balancing act between individuals’ rights and the broader public\ngood, other pandemic-related articles analyse the angle of palliative efforts\nby national legislators or simply struggles for efficiency within the\ncomplicated field of public procurement in crisis-ridden times. The piece by\nŞimal Efsane Erdoğan and Oana Ştefan and that\nby Raquel Carvalho, in turn, allow us to compare national reactions in this\nregard. I am immensely pleased\nto note that these articles reflect fruitful discussion of public procurement\nin times of crisis from a highly\nsuccessful conference held on this topic at the University of Tartu’s School of\nlaw last January.\n\nFinally but surely not least, I stress that I in no way\nwish to underestimate articles that, by dealing with somewhat more\nstability-rooted aspects of jurisprudence, are centred less on crises or\nstruggles. Age Värv writing about the role of foreign sources in Estonian\ncase-law; Aleksei Kelli, Margus Pedaste, and Äli Leijen providing a most\ninteresting empirical view of the so-called education exception to copyright (a\nsubject every academic certainly has come in contact with); the analysis Eneli\nLaurits provides of protecting privacy in certain criminal investigations;\neye­witness identification as revisited comprehensively by Annegrete Palu and\nAnneli Soo; and, finally, the description of a ‘super‑judge’ safeguarding such\nrealms, by Julia ­Laffranque, offer plenty of hearty food for legal thought.\n\nI extend my warmest thanks to all of the authors for\naddressing these difficult topics, thus advancing legal scholarship and,\nthrough their contribution, serving the common good.\n\n\n\n","PeriodicalId":55758,"journal":{"name":"Juridica International","volume":"115 17","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Juridica International","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12697/ji.2023.32.00","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This year’s Juridica International compendium offers articles on a wide variety of topics. From an initial glance, the problems tackled in those articles might not seem to have so much in common. Yet, even though offering windows to several quite distinct cross-sections of legal scholarship, many of the pieces, upon a closer look, reveal themselves to be very much interrelated. One notices that most of them share a theme of concern arising from crises in society that have recently come to a head, with a leitmotif of concern for the future and of venturing into unknowns – a backdrop so familiar to us these days’ that we might not even recognise its peculiarity. Contemporary times are marked by complex global developments such as the pandemic, the ongoing wars in Ukraine and of Israel/Hamas, a still very much unwritten future of AI influencing all aspects of life, etc. In times such as these, the law assumes a critical role in shaping not only our current doings but the course of human affairs far further down the line as well. The corresponding concern for our global future can be characterised as underpinning this edition from its very first article, a paper whereby Astrid Stadler calls on the courts to save the climate. The same focus could be ascribed to the examination of sensitive health data’s application as presented from research by Maret Kruus and the analysis penned by Kai Härmand examining AI’s impact on judicial action. Their scholarship silently invites us to ponder the profound influence that the judiciary and the legislature can have on the future. Furthermore, the need to accommodate in the manner most beneficial for society and for every individual alike seems to give significant impetus for such research. The article by Jānis Neimanis on recent Latvian Constitutional Court case-law reflects concerns of a similar nature, via illustrations from the response to SARS-CoV-2, empowerment of marginalised groups, and protection of democracy. While the work of Neimanis demonstrates how legal response may manifest a balancing act between individuals’ rights and the broader public good, other pandemic-related articles analyse the angle of palliative efforts by national legislators or simply struggles for efficiency within the complicated field of public procurement in crisis-ridden times. The piece by Şimal Efsane Erdoğan and Oana Ştefan and that by Raquel Carvalho, in turn, allow us to compare national reactions in this regard. I am immensely pleased to note that these articles reflect fruitful discussion of public procurement in times of crisis from a highly successful conference held on this topic at the University of Tartu’s School of law last January. Finally but surely not least, I stress that I in no way wish to underestimate articles that, by dealing with somewhat more stability-rooted aspects of jurisprudence, are centred less on crises or struggles. Age Värv writing about the role of foreign sources in Estonian case-law; Aleksei Kelli, Margus Pedaste, and Äli Leijen providing a most interesting empirical view of the so-called education exception to copyright (a subject every academic certainly has come in contact with); the analysis Eneli Laurits provides of protecting privacy in certain criminal investigations; eye­witness identification as revisited comprehensively by Annegrete Palu and Anneli Soo; and, finally, the description of a ‘super‑judge’ safeguarding such realms, by Julia ­Laffranque, offer plenty of hearty food for legal thought. I extend my warmest thanks to all of the authors for addressing these difficult topics, thus advancing legal scholarship and, through their contribution, serving the common good.
亲爱的读者
今年的《国际法学》简编提供了关于各种主题的文章。乍一看,这些文章所探讨的问题似乎并无太多共同之处。然而,尽管这些文章为法律学术的几个截然不同的领域提供了窗口,但仔细一看,其中的许多文章却显示出它们之间存在着很大的关联。我们注意到,大多数作品都有一个共同的主题,那就是对最近出现的社会危机的担忧,以及对未来和未知世界的担忧--这种背景如今对我们来说再熟悉不过了,以至于我们可能都没有意识到它的特殊性。当代的标志是复杂的全球事态发展,如大流行病、正在进行的乌克兰战争和以色列/哈马斯战争、人工智能影响生活方方面面的未来,等等。在这样的时代,法律不仅在影响我们当前的所作所为方面,而且在影响未来人类事务的进程方面都发挥着至关重要的作用。对全球未来的相应关注可以说是本版第一篇文章的基础,在这篇文章中,阿斯特丽德-施塔德勒(Astrid Stadler)呼吁法院拯救气候。马雷特-克鲁斯(Maret Kruus)对敏感健康数据应用的研究,以及凯-海尔曼德(Kai Härmand)对人工智能对司法行动影响的分析,也体现了同样的关注。他们的研究成果无声地邀请我们思考司法和立法机构对未来可能产生的深远影响。此外,以对社会和每个人都最有益的方式来适应的需要似乎也为此类研究提供了重要的动力。亚尼斯-内曼尼斯(Jānis Neimanis)的文章介绍了拉脱维亚宪法法院最近的案例法,通过对 SARS-CoV-2 的应对、边缘化群体的赋权以及对民主的保护等实例,反映了类似性质的关切。尼曼尼斯的作品展示了法律应对如何在个人权利和更广泛的公共利益之间取得平衡,而其他与大流行病相关的文章则从国家立法者所做的缓解努力的角度进行了分析,或者仅仅是在危机四伏的时期,在复杂的公共采购领域为提高效率而进行的斗争。埃尔多安和奥娜-斯特凡的文章以及拉克尔-卡瓦略的文章则让我们可以比较各国在这方面的反应。我非常高兴地注意到,这些文章反映了今年 1 月在塔尔图大学法学院就危机时期的公共采购问题举行的一次非常成功的会议所进行的富有成果的讨论。最后,但肯定不是最不重要的,我强调,我绝不希望低估那些通过处理法理学中更稳定的方面而较少以危机或斗争为中心的文章。Age Värv 撰写了外国资料来源在爱沙尼亚案例法中的作用;Aleksei Kelli、Margus Pedaste 和 Äli Leijen 对所谓的版权教育例外(每个学者肯定都接触过的问题)进行了最有趣的实证分析;EneliLaurits 对在某些刑事调查中保护隐私的分析;Annegrete Palu 和 Anneli Soo 对目击者辨认的全面重新审视;最后,Julia Laffranque 对保护此类领域的 "超级法官 "的描述,都为法律思考提供了丰富的食粮。我向所有作者致以最诚挚的谢意,感谢他们解决了这些棘手的问题,从而推动了法律学术的发展,并通过他们的贡献服务于公共利益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
审稿时长
20 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信