Institutional, policy and regulatory framework for sustainable development of the Egyptian aquaculture sector

This report presents the findings of a mission to critically review the institutional, policy and regulatory framework for sustainable development of the Egyptian aquaculture sector. The study was undertaken by an International Expert on Aquaculture Policy, and a National Expert on Institutions, on behalf of the Project “Improving Employment and Income through the Development of Egypt’s Aquaculture Sector“, implemented by WorldFish and CARE, and funded by the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation(SDC). The objective of the mission was to assess the current status of the Egyptian aquaculture sector, in terms of the policy, legal and institutional environment, with a view to suggesting the major issues to be addressed within a future policy dialogue

Jack Balkin's constitutionalism and the Expert Panel on Constitutional Recognition of Indigenous Australians

This article assesses the Expert Panel on Constitutional Recognition of Indigenous Australians\u27 Report and proposals from the perspective of constitutional theory. Introduction In January 2012, the Expert Panel on Constitutional Recognition of Indigenous Australians (‘Expert Panel’) delivered its report to the then Prime Minister making a number of recommendations to amend the Australian Constitution to ‘recognise’ Indigenous Australians. Rather than engage in a legal critique of the substance of the Expert Panel’s various proposals, this article approaches the Expert Panel’s Report and proposals as a whole from the perspective of constitutional theory. It argues that the Expert Panel’s Report and proposals strongly reflect the constitutional theory of the American constitutional theorist Jack Balkin. In his book Living Originalism, Balkin conceives of the United States Constitution functioning not only as ‘basic law’, distributing powers and setting up institutions of government, but also as ‘higher law’, embodying values and aspirations for the nation, and as ‘our law’, helping to constitute the people of the nation as a people. The first claim made in this article is that the Expert Panel conceives of the functions of the Australian Constitution in much the same way as Balkin conceives of the functions of the United States Constitution. The article makes a second claim. For Balkin, a constitution successfully functioning as basic law gives it procedural legitimacy whilst its success in functioning as higher law and our law gives it moral and sociological legitimacy respectively. Whilst the Australian Constitution does not really function as higher law or our law in Balkin’s sense, the Expert Panel’s adoption of that kind of thinking can be seen as a critique of the legitimacy of the Australian Constitution. The Expert Panel implicitly suggests that the Australian Constitution can be made more legitimate. The article also makes a third claim building upon the first two. It is argued that the Expert Panel is engaged in a project of constitutional redemption, a concept that features heavily in Living Originalism and which is the principal subject of its companion work Constitutional Redemption: Political Faith in an Unjust World. This article begins by setting out the background to the Expert Panel’s Report and notes its various proposals for amendments to the Australian Constitution. The article then turns to the first main claim. It explains Balkin’s tripartite view of constitutional functions and explores how the Expert Panel’s report and recommendations appear to be based on a view of the Australian Constitution as higher law and as our law. The article then turns to the second main claim, explaining how it is difficult to accept that the Australian Constitution functions as higher law and our law in Balkin’s sense and showing how the Expert Panel’s adoption of that thinking offers a critique of the legitimacy of the Australian Constitution. The article then turns to the third main claim and explores how the Expert Panel appears to be engaged in a project of constitutional redemption. The article concludes with a reference to The Castle and ‘the vibe’ and suggests that it is possible that the Australian people may one day look to the Australian Constitution as higher law and our law

Web-based tools and resources for legal translators: the JudGENTT translation-oriented glossaries for criminal courts translators

One of the requirements that most obviously characterises the work of translators in highly specialised fields is to have instant access to expert knowledge management systems that enable them to carry out their work with the precision and rigour demanded when working with specialist texts. However, in the field of professional private translation practice we do not yet have sufficiently powerful tools (of the kind available to international organisations) to enable translators to carry out their terminological work in a systematic way, combining the requirements for linguistic information with those for conceptual information and those related to the time pressure to which they are frequently subject in their work. In this paper we reflect on the general features that such expert knowledge management systems for freelance legal translators should possess, and in particular on the terminological resources that they should feature. To this end we present the design and methodology used by the GENTT research group in creating highly specialised glossaries for translators of criminal court procedure documents from four legal systems: Spain, France, the United Kingdom and Germany. These glossaries are part of a broader webbased expert knowledge management system for translators which also encompasses conceptual (legal concepts and procedures) and textual resources (corpus).This article is part of the research project: 2012-2014 (P1·1B2012-53) funded by the UJI and the research project FFI2012-34200, funded by the Spanish Ministry of Economy (MINECO) and developed by the GENTT research group of the University Jaume I (Spain)

The Explanation Dialogues: Understanding How Legal Experts Reason About XAI Methods

The Explanation Dialogues project is an expert focus study that aims to uncover expectations, reasoning, and rules of legal experts and practitioners towards explainable artificial intelligence (XAI). We examine legal perceptions and disputes that arise in a fictional scenario that resembles a daily life situation - a bank’s use of an automated decision-making (ADM) system to decide on credit allocation to individuals. Through this simulation, the study aims to provide insights into the legal value and validity of explanations of ADMs, identify potential gaps and issues that may arise in the context of compliance with European legislation, and provide guidance on how to address these shortcomings

Where design and law meet - An empirical study for understanding legal design and its implication for research and practice

This thesis explores the notion of legal design and proposes its process. The research, conducted through a literature review and expert interviews, provides both academic and empirical findings regarding the subject. Through the literature review, this thesis argues that legal design is an evolving discipline that incorporates many design methods into its framework. First, this study illustrates how the influence of design in the field of law led to the exploration of legal design. Regarding legal design, designerly thinking and doing, including visualization, human-centered design, the design thinking process, and participatory design methods, have been utilized to improve communication of legal documents as well as the user experience of legal services and legal systems. The changed perspective of viewing the mass as the end-user of the law rather than only legal experts and the collaborative, multidisciplinary exploration drives law and design professionals to explore a more radical form of collaboration—legal design—as a new research topic. In the process, the designer who becomes familiar with the legal context and the lawyer who learns designerly think-ing and doing can each claim to be a legal designer. Expert interviews offer empirical knowledge of real-world legal design practices. For instance, through the analysis of the seven collected case projects and expert interviews, this thesis illustrates the understanding of legal design from the standpoint of two parties—designers and lawyers. The insight being is to create a space for legal design at the intersection of design, law, and technology. To explore the space, a legal design process generated from the interviews is proposed. Based on the legal design process, this study suggests three roles designers should assume when engaged in a project with law stakeholders. This thesis also suggests embedding the system thinking within the legal design framework and encouraging the use of more service design methods in the legal design process in order to tackle the complexity of the legal challenges. This thesis conducts explorative research to understand legal design from a design researcher’s perspective. Thus, its limitations include the research methods, the selection of the interviewees, and the scope of the collected case projects. The legal design framework proposed in this study, therefore, needs to be further validated and supported by more comprehensive data

Revitalizing Multilateral Governance at the World Trade Organization Policy Brief based on the Report of the High-Level Board of Experts on the Future of Global Trade Governance. Bertelsmann Policy Brief 2018

If international trade is not governed by rules, mere might dictates what is right. The World Trade Organization (WTO) serves as a place where trade policy issues are addressed, disputes arbitrated, legal frameworks derived and enforced. Through these functions, the WTO ensures that the rules of trade policy are inspired by fairness and reciprocity rather than national interest. It is more important than ever to vitalize the global public good that it represents against various threats that have been undermining it. Therefore, the Global Economic Dynamics project of the Bertelsmann Stiftung has called into life a High- Level Board of Experts on the Future of Global Trade ominant view among the members of the Expert Board. Members of the Board participated in meetings on a Governance. Composed of eminent experts and seasoned trade diplomats, it elaborated a series of feasible policy recommendations that will increase the effectiveness and salience of the WTO. We hope that this Report provides helpful suggestions in a time marked by increasing trade disputes and protectionism and instead contributes to stronger multilateral institutions and fora

Teaching Case Study: Gender Data Trouble in a Student Information System

In 2022, StateU, a large public university in the United States, embarked on a project to collect and use personal pronouns in its information systems. The project lead and functional expert was StateU's Administrative Leader. As she prepared for the first project meeting, she reflected on lessons learned from a past project she led to expand the collection of student gender data to record legal sex, gender identity, and sexual orientation. That project involved navigating challenging decisions about user interface design, underlying databases, data privacy and security, and reporting, underpinned by the desire to best serve minoritized and vulnerable populations. She recalled that: "A society with more data about LGBTQ people is not automatically a society that is better for LGBTQ people". She wondered if collecting pronoun data was the right choice in the first place

INTERNATIONAL PROJECTS AS A NEW FORM OF COLLABORATION IN THE SPHERE OF EXPERT ENSURING OF JUSTICE

In the article some statements ofIn the article the participation of the National Science Center «Hon. Prof. M. S. Bokarius Forensic Science Institute» in the bilateral research project was elucidated. It had been emphasized that the participation in the projects of the international cooperation is a new form of interaction of institutions of forensic activity that promote a development of the sphere of expert ensuring of justice. The regulatory and legal enactments of Ukraine and the Republic of Latvian, which regulate the participation’ question of scientists in fundamental and applied international research projects were analyzed. It is noticed that, Riga Stradins University and the National Science Center «Hon. Prof. M. S. Bokarius Forensic Science Institute» are participants of Joint Scientific Research Project. The content of the Ukrainian-Latvian project on the topic «Open Educational Resource: Forensic Science» is revealed that was devoted to the complex research of modern scientific approaches, the formation of theoretical regulations and practical summaries, related to the improvement of implementation of educational and scientific activity’s mechanisms of modern scientific approaches in the field of expert ensuring of justice Within the framework of the scientific project particular topical issues in forensic science are proposed to resolved. As a result of work on the project it is planned to publish scientific works, an open web-resource containing scientific, research and other materials, and also educational video presentations of work of the forensic expert with a possibility of their remote use is created. It was proved that the participation of domestic institutions within international projects assists the integration to European Higher Education Area and European Forensic Science Area.publishersversionPeer reviewe

Methodology on Trial: The Rhetorical Function of Toulminian Warrants in Expert Testimony

While providing expert testimony in jury trials, scientists face an array of conflicting legal requirements. Expert witnesses must demonstrate the soundness of their scientific methodology, but they must do so with little or no reference to the literature of their field. They must explain advanced scientific concepts while phrasing their explanations as a direct response to a lawyer\u27s question. This project examines the rhetorical strategies expert witnesses utilize as they negotiate these conflicting requirements. Previous studies have examined persuasive discourse created for and by members of an scientific academic discipline, but my study examines how scientists defend their knowledge making practices to public audiences in a highly pressurized, overtly agnostic setting. My study also features a distinctive emphasis on the portions of expert testimony in which expert witnesses describe and defend the scientific methodologies that under-gird the evidence they present to the jury. To analyze these statements, I combine a Toulminian coding system with one developed to analyze assertions of expertise made in non-academic contexts. I identify four distinct challenges expert witnesses face. I then trace the origins of these challenges to differences in the processes through which lawyers and scientists are professionalized. I elucidate the implications these challenges have for our justice system, for the scientific community, and for technical communication scholars