New Media, Free Expression, and the Offences Against the State Acts

New media facilitates communication and creates a common, lived experience. It also carries the potential for great harm on an individual and societal scale. Posting integrates information and emotion, with study after study finding that fear and anger transfer most readily online. Isolation follows, with insular groups forming. The result is an increasing bifurcation of society. Scholars also write about rising levels of depression and suicide that stem from online dependence and replacing analogical experience with digital interaction, as well as escalating levels of anxiety that are rooted in the validation expectation of the ‘like’ function. These changes generate instability and contribute to a volatile social environment. Significant political risks also accompany this novel genre. Hostile actors can use social media platforms to deepen political schisms, to promote certain candidates, and, as demonstrated by the recent Cambridge Analytica debacle, to swing elections. Extremist groups and terrorist organisations can use online interactions to build sympathetic audiences and to recruit adherents. Since 1939, the Offences Against the State Act (OAS) has served as the primary vehicle for confronting political violence and challenges to state authority. How effective is it in light of new media? The challenges are legion. Terrorist recruitment is just the tip of the iceberg. Social networking sites allow for targeted and global fundraising, international direction and control, anonymous power structures, and access to expertise. These platforms create spaces within which extreme ideologies can prosper, targeting individuals likely to be sympathetic to the cause, 24 hours a day, seven days a week, ad infinitum. They offer an alternative reality, subject to factual manipulation and direction—a problem exacerbated by the risk of so-called deep fakes: autonomously-generated content that makes it appear that people acted, or that certain circumstances occurred, which never did. In November 2019 the Irish Government adopted a new regulation targeting social media. The measure focuses on political advertising and to ensure that voters have access to accurate information. It does not address the myriad further risks. This chapter, accordingly, focuses on ways in which the Offences Against the State Act (OAS) and related laws have historically treated free expression as a prelude to understanding how and whether the existing provisions are adequate for challenges from new media

Local Government Policy and Planning for Unmanned Aerial Systems

This research identifies key state and local government stakeholders in California for drone policy creation and implementation, and describes their perceptions and understanding of drone policy. The investigation assessed stakeholders’ positions, interests, and influence on issues, with the goal of providing potential policy input to achieve successful drone integration in urban environments and within the national airspace of the United States. The research examined regulatory priorities through the use of a two-tiered Stakeholder Analysis Process. The first tier consisted of a detailed survey sent out to over 450 local agencies and jurisdictions in California. The second tier consisted of an in-person focus group to discuss survey results as well as to gain deeper insights into local policymakers’ current concerns. Results from the two tiers of analysis, as well as recommendations, are provided here

Labour Administration Reforms in China

[Excerpt] This publication provides an explanation of the comprehensive labour administration system in China, including its recent advances, with emphasis on its public services functions, such as public employment, labour inspection and social insurance services. With the recent improvements to both the legal framework and the institutions of labour administration, it is believed that these public services will play bigger and more active roles in ensuring compliance with legislation and protecting the legitimate rights and interests of employers and workers alike

Preparing for the New Minorities in Europe: The EU Influence on National Minority Protection in Romania and Slovakia. Jean Monnet/Robert Schuman Paper Series Vol. 5 No. 25, August 2005

[From the introduction]. This paper examines the mechanisms and strategies of the EU in supporting the process of democratization in Central and Eastern Europe by concentrating on one particular area which seemed most significant in view of the escalation of ethnic conflict in the region. I focus on the influence of the EU’s representatives and institutions in inducing cooperation between states and ethnic groups within states for the purpose of minority rights expansion and implementation by means of the promise of integration. By definition, democratization includes "... the processes whereby the rules and procedures of citizenship are either applied to political institutions previously governed by other principles... or expanded to include persons not previously enjoying such rights and obligations (e.g. ethnic minorities, women, foreign residents, etc.) or extended to cover issues and institutions not previously subject to citizen participation (state agencies, military establishments, etc.)" (Schmitter and O'Donnell, 1986: 8). As early as 1993, the European Council had devised specific criteria for the evaluation of a country’s preparedness to gain membership in the Union, and on par with the economic requirements were political conditions which outlined the road towards integration. The political conditionality for the Central and Eastern European countries’ membership was spelled out in the concluding document of the Copenhagen summit on 21-22 June 1993, where the European Council put forward what came to be known as the “Copenhagen criteria” for EU admission: “Stability of institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities, the existence of a functioning market economy as well as the capacity to cope with competitive pressure and market forces within the Union.” (1) While minority rights were never specifically listed or clearly outlined, I will demonstrate that through the statements of its representatives and the official reports European institutions have issued on the countries’ progress towards accession, the EU has continuously had an essential role in the expansion of minority rights