国家安全利益对知情权的限制:正当性问题

Tetiana Shynkar
{"title":"国家安全利益对知情权的限制:正当性问题","authors":"Tetiana Shynkar","doi":"10.32518/sals1.2023.56","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The relevance of this study is conditioned upon the lack of a single theoretical justification for limiting the right to information, even though Ukrainian legislation allows such limitations in the Constitution. The purpose of this study was to analyse certain cases of restrictions on the right to information in the interests of national security and determine ways to justify such restrictions. The methodological framework of this study included the analysis of law enforcement practices concerning the restriction of the right to information. The study established that, despite a considerable theoretical basis in protection of human and civil rights and freedoms, the modern practice of administrative courts is based only on providing a legal assessment of the actions of the Security Service of Ukraine regarding the recognition of information and other activities of the subject of information relations as illegal in the light of the powers and advantages granted to the Service pursuant to Article 10 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The absence of a single mechanism for restricting the right to information in the interests of national security was proved. The paper substantiated that the courts and state bodies of Ukraine, which are responsible for regulating information activities, have not yet developed their own ways and mechanisms for restricting the right to information, which would factor in their practice of providing a legal assessment of each of these cases. It was noted that the basic means of justifying the restriction of the right to information in the interests of national security, as well as any restriction of the right to information, is the use of a “three-part test”. The outlined grounds for localizing the right to information will be useful for scientists, law enforcement officers, and information security specialists for their legitimate application.","PeriodicalId":496480,"journal":{"name":"Socìalʹno-pravovì studìï","volume":"516 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Restriction of the right to information in the interests of national security: The problem of justification\",\"authors\":\"Tetiana Shynkar\",\"doi\":\"10.32518/sals1.2023.56\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The relevance of this study is conditioned upon the lack of a single theoretical justification for limiting the right to information, even though Ukrainian legislation allows such limitations in the Constitution. The purpose of this study was to analyse certain cases of restrictions on the right to information in the interests of national security and determine ways to justify such restrictions. The methodological framework of this study included the analysis of law enforcement practices concerning the restriction of the right to information. The study established that, despite a considerable theoretical basis in protection of human and civil rights and freedoms, the modern practice of administrative courts is based only on providing a legal assessment of the actions of the Security Service of Ukraine regarding the recognition of information and other activities of the subject of information relations as illegal in the light of the powers and advantages granted to the Service pursuant to Article 10 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The absence of a single mechanism for restricting the right to information in the interests of national security was proved. The paper substantiated that the courts and state bodies of Ukraine, which are responsible for regulating information activities, have not yet developed their own ways and mechanisms for restricting the right to information, which would factor in their practice of providing a legal assessment of each of these cases. It was noted that the basic means of justifying the restriction of the right to information in the interests of national security, as well as any restriction of the right to information, is the use of a “three-part test”. The outlined grounds for localizing the right to information will be useful for scientists, law enforcement officers, and information security specialists for their legitimate application.\",\"PeriodicalId\":496480,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Socìalʹno-pravovì studìï\",\"volume\":\"516 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Socìalʹno-pravovì studìï\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.32518/sals1.2023.56\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Socìalʹno-pravovì studìï","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.32518/sals1.2023.56","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这项研究的相关性取决于缺乏限制知情权的单一理论理由,尽管乌克兰立法在《宪法》中允许这种限制。这项研究的目的是分析为了国家安全的利益而限制知情权的某些情况,并确定证明这种限制的理由的方法。本研究的方法框架包括对有关限制知情权的执法做法的分析。这项研究确定,尽管在保护人权和公民权利与自由方面有相当大的理论基础,行政法院的现代实践仅基于对乌克兰安全局的行动进行法律评估,根据《保护人权和基本自由公约》第10条赋予该机构的权力和优势,承认信息和信息关系主体的其他活动是非法的。事实证明,为了国家安全的利益,缺乏一种单一的机制来限制获取信息的权利。该文件证实,负责管理新闻活动的乌克兰法院和国家机构尚未制定自己的方式和机制来限制获得信息的权利,这将影响到它们对每一个案件进行法律评估的做法。有人指出,为国家安全利益限制知情权以及对知情权的任何限制辩护的基本手段是使用“三部分检验”。概述的信息权利本地化的理由对于科学家、执法人员和信息安全专家的合法应用将是有用的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Restriction of the right to information in the interests of national security: The problem of justification
The relevance of this study is conditioned upon the lack of a single theoretical justification for limiting the right to information, even though Ukrainian legislation allows such limitations in the Constitution. The purpose of this study was to analyse certain cases of restrictions on the right to information in the interests of national security and determine ways to justify such restrictions. The methodological framework of this study included the analysis of law enforcement practices concerning the restriction of the right to information. The study established that, despite a considerable theoretical basis in protection of human and civil rights and freedoms, the modern practice of administrative courts is based only on providing a legal assessment of the actions of the Security Service of Ukraine regarding the recognition of information and other activities of the subject of information relations as illegal in the light of the powers and advantages granted to the Service pursuant to Article 10 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The absence of a single mechanism for restricting the right to information in the interests of national security was proved. The paper substantiated that the courts and state bodies of Ukraine, which are responsible for regulating information activities, have not yet developed their own ways and mechanisms for restricting the right to information, which would factor in their practice of providing a legal assessment of each of these cases. It was noted that the basic means of justifying the restriction of the right to information in the interests of national security, as well as any restriction of the right to information, is the use of a “three-part test”. The outlined grounds for localizing the right to information will be useful for scientists, law enforcement officers, and information security specialists for their legitimate application.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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