{"title":"The Crypto-Wars myth: The reality of state access to encrypted communications","authors":"C. Murphy","doi":"10.1177/1473779520980556","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1473779520980556","url":null,"abstract":"This article draws on four state studies to address a myth of the contemporary debate on internet communications: that, in the face of an internet ‘going dark’, states face a choice between absolute privacy and unfettered access to data. The legal powers which already exist suggest that certain states have a range of possible means of access to encrypted data. The lack of awareness over these powers may be because, despite public debate, democratic oversight remains deficient, while judiciaries and other institutions play useful but limited roles. The cross-territorial nature of the internet presents regulatory challenges and opportunities for reform—albeit in an environment in which the myth of Crypto-Wars is far from useful.","PeriodicalId":87174,"journal":{"name":"Common law world review","volume":"49 1","pages":"245 - 261"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1473779520980556","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46484165","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"State access to encrypted communications: A symposium","authors":"C. Murphy","doi":"10.1177/1473779520980252","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1473779520980252","url":null,"abstract":"In 2015, 15 authors in the Journal of Cybersecurity concluded that ‘the damage that could be caused by law enforcement exceptional access requirements would be even greater today than it would have been 20 years ago’. Their article acknowledges the debate’s genesis in the 1990s controversy over the Clipper Chip—a controversy known as the ‘Crypto-Wars’. The Clipper Chip was devised by the US National Security Agency (NSA) to provide encryption but with a built-in backdoor to allow the NSA access data encrypted by it. Ultimately, the chip’s development was abandoned. Today, the expansion of digital communications makes the question even more pressing. In her consideration of these changes Laura K. Donohue highlights that:","PeriodicalId":87174,"journal":{"name":"Common law world review","volume":"49 1","pages":"153 - 159"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1473779520980252","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48592374","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"State access to encrypted data in the United Kingdom: The ‘transparent’ approach","authors":"B. Keenan","doi":"10.1177/1473779519892641","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1473779519892641","url":null,"abstract":"This article foregrounds four key powers through which the UK intelligence and police agencies (broadly referred to hereafter as ‘law enforcement’) may access encrypted communications and data. It is structured as follows. First, a brief overview of the European Court of Human Rights’ jurisprudence on communications surveillance contextualises the overarching normative framework that must be translated into domestic law. The four powers are then discussed, both in legal and practical terms. The first two powers operate covertly, without the knowledge of the target. The latter two operate coercively, allowing police to demand individuals unlock encrypted data on penalty of prosecution. The article argues that the overall effect is to weaken encryption systems globally.","PeriodicalId":87174,"journal":{"name":"Common law world review","volume":"49 1","pages":"223 - 244"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1473779519892641","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48517603","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Reform of civil procedure in Cyprus: Delivering justice in a more efficient and timely way","authors":"Nicholas Mouttotos","doi":"10.1177/1473779520924441","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1473779520924441","url":null,"abstract":"Dissatisfaction with the administration of justice is as old as law proclaimed the distinguished American legal scholar Roscoe Pound in 1906. The system of administration of justice has been under considerable scrutiny in Cyprus following the excessive delays in resolving disputes that are highlighted in reports such as the European Union’s Justice Scoreboard, the World Bank’s Doing Business Reports as well as European Commission papers on Cyprus, urging authorities to modernize the system in order to be able to meet the demands following the financial crisis. For this reason, various experts have been assigned with the task of identifying the problems and coming up with proposals and solutions. The discussions, though, are not new as similar problems have been presented in common law jurisdictions, in particular, but they have been tackled decades ago, with the adoption of reforms that moved the adversarial system of justice closer to civilian stereotypes.","PeriodicalId":87174,"journal":{"name":"Common law world review","volume":"49 1","pages":"130 - 99"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1473779520924441","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44688947","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Through which glass darkly? Constitutional principle in legality and constitutionality review","authors":"L. Sirota","doi":"10.1177/1473779520927715","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1473779520927715","url":null,"abstract":"In recent years, the Supreme Courts of Canada and the United Kingdom have decided very similar cases on the permissibility of high fees for access to adjudication. The outcomes of the cases were similar: the fees were struck down. In the Canadian case, they were held to infringe s 96 of the Constitution Act, 1867; in the United Kingdom, they were said to be a violation of the common law right of access to courts not authorized by statute. Yet a comparison of the reasoning of the two supreme courts is instructive. While the UK Supreme Court forthrightly and thoughtfully engaged with the impact of the fees at issue on the Rule of Law, the Canadian one failed to do so and instead relied on a strained interpretation of a constitutional provision of questionable relevance. This suggests that, perhaps surprisingly, legality review, being less bound up with constitutional text and causing courts less anxiety about its legitimacy, can allow the courts better to canvass the real issues cases implicating constitutional rights and principles present than constitutionality review.","PeriodicalId":87174,"journal":{"name":"Common law world review","volume":"49 1","pages":"131 - 150"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1473779520927715","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43768099","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Strengthening internal controls of listed companies in the United Kingdom: Lessons and experiences from the United States","authors":"J. Ho","doi":"10.1177/14737795221116398","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14737795221116398","url":null,"abstract":"In April 2018, Sir John Kingman was asked by the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) of the United Kingdom (UK) to undertake an independent review of the Financial Reporting Council. The Kingman review which was published in December 2018 made recommendations for a major overhaul of the UK corporate financial reporting and audit regulations. A key recommendation made in the Kingman review is that the UK should consider introducing tougher regulation in respect of listed companies’ internal controls, similar to that applying in the United States (US) under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX). This article is written against such background and examines what lessons and experiences can regulators and companies in the UK learn from the other side of the Atlantic in strengthening internal controls. It seeks to recommend what measures UK regulators and companies can adopt to prepare themselves for the likely introduction of a SOX-style regime of internal controls.","PeriodicalId":87174,"journal":{"name":"Common law world review","volume":"51 1","pages":"172 - 197"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46861471","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Official access to encrypted communications in New Zealand: Not more powers but more principle?","authors":"B. Keith","doi":"10.1177/1473779520908293","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1473779520908293","url":null,"abstract":"Although New Zealand is a member of the ‘Five Eyes’ intelligence community, it has taken a relatively cautious and in recent years often deliberative approach to counterterrorism powers, including in relation to access to encrypted communications. That approach can be seen to reflect New Zealand’s security, legal and political context and in particular its tendencies to independence, pragmatism and support for human rights. It is also apparent in the responses to date to the deaths of 51 people in the March 2019 attack on two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand and, in particular, in the Christchurch Call, an initiative against terrorist and violent extremist content online. The Call is a non-binding standard adopted in cooperation with numerous other governments and large online service providers and includes commitments to transparency and human rights. As Five Eyes countries’ individual and collective positions concerning access to encrypted communications become increasingly forceful, the question is whether New Zealand will follow those positions or pursue more principled, collaborative and likely more workable measures, in line with its wider approach and the example of the Call.","PeriodicalId":87174,"journal":{"name":"Common law world review","volume":"49 1","pages":"199 - 222"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-03-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1473779520908293","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46471354","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Book review: The Triangular Constitution","authors":"D. Kenny","doi":"10.1177/1473779520911057","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1473779520911057","url":null,"abstract":"Tom Flynn’s excellent book, The Triangular Constitution, is an insightful contribution to constitutional theory. It focuses on transnational constitutionalism, and the intermingling of national and international law, and explores these topics by means of a detailed case study of Ireland. He seeks to deeply critique and ultimately redeem theories of constitutional pluralism. I believe the critique to be very effective, but the attempt at subsequent improvement less so. For me, the book works best as a form of constitutional anti-theory: showing the limits and pitfalls of theory and does not need to offer prescriptions.","PeriodicalId":87174,"journal":{"name":"Common law world review","volume":"49 1","pages":"92 - 96"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1473779520911057","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48130181","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Enhancing patient privacy protection under Hong Kong’s Electronic Health Record Sharing System","authors":"Rebecca Ong, Sandy Sabapathy","doi":"10.1177/1473779520914290","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1473779520914290","url":null,"abstract":"While it is true that the expanded use of health information and electronic health records (eHRs) can help deliver better healthcare, there remains the need to reconcile citizens’ legitimate concerns for privacy protection and confidentiality in the use of their personal health data, and the potential for violation of their privacy. Under the Hong Kong’s Electronic Health Record Sharing System (eHRSS), the eHR of the individual patient can be accessed and shared between healthcare providers for healthcare-related purposes. Although the Electronic Health Record Sharing System Ordinance (Cap 625) (the ‘eHRSSO’) and the Personal Data (Privacy) Ordinance (Cap 486) (the ‘PD(P)O’) provide protection for personal data and patients’ privacy, the eHRSS has come under greater scrutiny given the rise in data breaches experienced globally and in Hong Kong. The article’s objective is twofold. It first examines the eHRSS specifically with regard to some of the more pertinent provisions of the eHRSSO and the PD(P)O, to critically evaluate the extent to which these provisions ensure and protect patient privacy. Thence it offers suggestions and recommendations as to how protection for patient privacy can be enhanced and, indeed, altogether better ensured.","PeriodicalId":87174,"journal":{"name":"Common law world review","volume":"49 1","pages":"30 - 4"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1473779520914290","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44454708","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}