Four models of due process

Ramraj, Victor V.

doi:10.1093/icon/2.3.492

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Due process is a concept that reflects a concern with the exercise of power in societies that operate under the ''rule of law'' (Belton, 2005;Ramraj, 2004). Due process has both instrumental effects in subjecting the exercise of power to scrutiny and constraint, and symbolic effects in legitimating the exercise of power by tying it to democratic norms.…”

Section: Due Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

Due Process and Standard-setting: An Analysis of Due Process in Three Canadian Accounting and Auditing Standard-setting Bodies

Richardson

2007

J Bus Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Due Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

Due Process and Standard-setting: An Analysis of Due Process in Three Canadian Accounting and Auditing Standard-setting Bodies

Richardson

2007

J Bus Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are two main reasons why due process is important. The first is substantive: due process helps to improve the quality of decision-making to ensure fair outcomes (Endicott, 2018;Ramraj, 2004). This is because it forces the decision-maker(s) to consider all of the relevant factors and to justify the outcome.…”

Section: Implement An Appeals Mechanismmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is also in the public interest that the outcomes are fair (Endicott, 2018). The second is procedural: due process ensures that those affected by a decision are able to participate in the process of defending their rights and interests (Endicott, 2018;Ramraj, 2004). It further ensures equal treatment of those involved and that decisions are impartial and based on clearly communicated rules as opposed to personal opinions (Brems and Lavrysen, 2013;Ramraj, 2004).…”

Section: Implement An Appeals Mechanismmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The second is procedural: due process ensures that those affected by a decision are able to participate in the process of defending their rights and interests (Endicott, 2018;Ramraj, 2004). It further ensures equal treatment of those involved and that decisions are impartial and based on clearly communicated rules as opposed to personal opinions (Brems and Lavrysen, 2013;Ramraj, 2004). This has a positive impact on individuals' self-worth (Brems and Lavrysen, 2013) and makes it more difficult for an authority to act arbitrarily, thus increasing transparency (Endicott, 2018).…”

Section: Implement An Appeals Mechanismmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Regulating terrorist content on tech platforms: A proposed framework based on social regulation

Watkin¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scholars have been arguing for years that responses to terrorist content on tech platforms have, to-date, been inadequate. Past responses have been reactive and fragmented with tech platforms self-regulating. Over the last few years, many governments began to decide that the self-regulatory approach was not working. As a result, a number of regulatory frameworks have been proposed and/or implemented. However, they have been highly criticised. The purpose of this thesis is to propose a new regulatory framework to counter terrorist content on tech platforms and overcome many of these criticisms. Scholars have argued that it is vital that future regulation be informed by past experience and supported by evidence from prior research. Therefore, a number of steps were taken. First, this thesis examines a review of literature into what platforms are exploited by terrorist organisations. Next, a content analysis was undertaken on blogposts that tech platforms publish in order to investigate the efforts that tech platforms report making to counter terrorist content on their services and the challenges that they face. Third, a sample of existing or currently proposed regulatory frameworks were examined in order to learn what was done well and what gaps, limitations and challenges exist that require addressing in future regulation. Finally, social regulation theory was identified as applicable in this regulatory context. Social regulation strategies were examined in three other regulatory contexts in order to examine whether they could be used in this regulatory context. The findings from the above analyses were used to inform a new regulatory framework that is proposed in this thesis. In addition to proposing a new regulatory framework, this thesis also identified three compliance issues that tech platforms may face. These compliance issues are addressed alongside the proposal of the framework. Overall, it is argued that previous regulatory attempts failed to consider the diverse array of challenges that are faced by different platforms when countering terrorist content. The regulatory framework proposed in this thesis researched these challenges and identified strategies from a social regulation approach, learning lessons from how they were applied elsewhere to overcome some of the key criticisms and limitations of existing regulatory practice.

show abstract

Due Process

Zedner¹,

Stuckenberg²

2019

Core Concepts in Criminal Law and Criminal Justice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Four models of due process

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

Due Process and Standard-setting: An Analysis of Due Process in Three Canadian Accounting and Auditing Standard-setting Bodies

Due Process and Standard-setting: An Analysis of Due Process in Three Canadian Accounting and Auditing Standard-setting Bodies

Regulating terrorist content on tech platforms: A proposed framework based on social regulation

Due Process

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About