1,650,934 research outputs found

    Review of the law relating to self-defence: issues paper

    Get PDF
    This issues paper examines possible changes to the law of self-defence in Tasmania, and invites submissions from the public. Background In September 2011, the Director of Public Prosecutions wrote to the Attorney-General to raise concerns that the current Tasmanian law on self-defence, as contained in s 46 of the Criminal Code (Tas), was too lenient and was out of step with modern standards. In November 2012, the Attorney- General requested that the Tasmania Law Reform Institute conduct a far-reaching examination of the law in Tasmania relating to self-defence and provide advice as to whether the law should be amended. In relation to self-defence, this Issues Paper considers whether the current law of self-defence in Tasmania should be retained or whether any amendments should be made to the existing law. It considers the circumstances in which a person is lawfully entitled to use force (including lethal force) in defence of themselves or another person. In cases where the accused’s perception of the situation corresponds with the actual situation, this may appear a relatively intuitive and straightforward assessment. However, greater difficulties arise when there is a difference between the actual circumstances and the circumstances as the accused saw them. There is scope for considerable debate about the extent to which a person can rely on a mistaken belief for the purposes of self-defence, and whether the reason for the mistake has a role to play in making this assessment. This is the particular concern addressed in this Paper. It considers whether a person should be able to rely on: a mistake that results from a delusion arising from a mental illness; a mistake that was a result of psychological factors personal to the accused that meant that they were more sensitive to threats of danger than the normal person; or a mistake that arises from self-induced intoxication. The Paper also considers whether it is desirable to ensure consistency between the defence of selfdefence and other defences such as prevention of certain crimes and defence of dwelling-house. To this end, it examines issues that arise in relation to defence of property, and the special status the home enjoys as a place of sanctuary. It considers whether the defences of prevention of crime in s 39 and defence of dwelling-house in s 40 of the Criminal Code might more appropriately be dealt with in a consolidated defence provision or whether the defences involve unique considerations that warrant a stand-alone provision.   Submissions are invited from the public, find out more about making a submission here

    Review of child protection mandatory reporting laws for the early childhood education and care sector

    Get PDF
    This discussion paper seeks submissions on a review of child protection mandatory reporting requirements for the early childhood education and care sector. The Queensland Law Reform Commission has released a discussion paper (WP 73) seeking submissions on its review of child protection mandatory reporting requirements for the early childhood education and care sector (the ECEC sector). The Child Protection Act 1999 (Qld) requires certain people (including doctors, nurses, teachers, certain police officers and statutory office holders) to report suspected cases of child abuse to the Department of Communities, Child Safety and Disability Services. Those mandatory reporting requirements do not apply to the ECEC sector. The review will consider whether the mandatory reporting requirements under the Act should be expanded to apply to the ECEC sector, including long day care and family day care services and kindergartens. If the Commission recommends the expansion of the mandatory reporting requirements to the ECEC sector, the Commission must also make recommendations as to which professionals, office holders or workers within that sector should be subject to those requirements. See Related Content below for questions for discussion, terms of reference, and privacy statement

    Why Reform Europe's Universities?

    Get PDF
    Based on a survey of European universities, this policy brief states that despite the good performance of some countries, Europe as a whole trails the US by a wide margin. The reason is two-fold. First, Europe invests too little in higher education. Second, European universities suffer from poor governance, insufficient autonomy and often perverse incentives. If Europe is to be a leader in the global knowledge economy, comprehensive reform of higher education is the order of the day. Most countries should invest an extra one percent in higher education each year, and universities should be given more autonomy in budgets, hiring and remuneration.

    Reform of the Global Financial Architecture

    Get PDF
    This paper examines the implications of the global financialcrisis of 2007-10 for reform of the global financial architecture and identifies institutional and substantive reforms by organizations such as the IMF and Financial Stability Board. The publication was prepared for a conference sponsored by Bruegel and the Peterson Institute for International Economics (8 October 2010), as part of a project sponsored by the European Commission.

    IFRS Sustainability Requires Further Governance Reform

    Get PDF
    This Policy Contribution reproduces the text of a letter sent by Senior Fellow Nicolas Véron to Gerrit Zalm, the Chairman of the International Accounting Standards Committee Foundation (IASCF) in response to the Foundation's public consultation on Part 2 of its Constitution Review. Véron writes that a broader strategic readjustment on the part of the IASCF is necessary if the Foundation hopes to regain the support of the global investment community, its most crucial group of stakeholders. The Foundation must make itself more responsive and accountable to the investment community, a requirement that has become more urgent due to the crisis.

    EU financial regulatory reform: a status report

    Get PDF
    In this paper, Nicolas Véron argues that the EU regulatory response to the crisis has been generally slower in the EU than in the United States, for four main reasons: swifter financial crisis management and resolution in the US; structural differences in legislative processes; the EUÂ?s front-loading of institutional reform, most notably the creation of European Supervisory Authorities; and the timetable of renewal of the European Commission in 2009-10. The EU has nevertheless initiated or completed significant regulatory initiatives in terms of banking, market structures, private equity and hedge funds, rating agencies and accounting. However, major further challenges loom.

    Empowering the IMF: Should Reform be a Requirement for Increasing the Fund's Resources?

    Get PDF
    This paper briefly reviews the IMF’s current practices and policy-making in the context of a proposed quadrupling of IMF resources to $1 trillion dollars, and a consequent increase in the Fund’s influence over economic policy-making in developing countries. It finds that the IMF is still prescribing inappropriate policies that could unnecessarily exacerbate economic downturns in a number of countries. The paper concludes that these pro-cyclical policies can exacerbate the world economic downturn. Perhaps more importantly, the re-establishment of the IMF as a major power in economic and decision-making in low-and-middle income countries, with little or no voice for these countries in the IMF’s decision-making, could have long-term implications for growth, development, and social indicators in many countries. The authors propose some reforms in the areas of governance and accountability to be attached of funding increases, in order to help prevent adverse outcomes.IMF
    corecore