"S. 300, S. 552, S. 580, S. 674, S. 675, S. 678, S. 798, S. 824, S. 916, S. 917. S. 992, S. 1007, S. 1094, S. 1194, S. 1333, and S. 2050, bills relating to crime syndicates, wiretapping, admissibility in evidence of confessions, assisting State and local governments in combating crime and related areas of criminal laws and procedures." ; Hearings held Mar. 7-July 12, 1967. ; Mode of access: Internet.
Intolerance -- Intolerance in law enforcement and corrections -- Subterfuge -- Subterfuge in law enforcement and corrections -- Intrusiveness -- Intrusiveness in law enforcement and corrections -- Craftiness -- Craftiness in law enforcement and corrections -- Favoritism -- Favoritism in law enforcement and corrections -- Cruelty -- Cruelty in law enforcement and corrections -- Subservience -- Subservience in law enforcement and corrections -- Botched justice : poorly decided legal cases of the past
The legal foundation of compulsory interventions towards substance abusers in Scandinavian social law has moved from similarity to dissimilarity. The aim of this article is to explain this development by focusing on the relationship between three general discourses in the preparation of these acts in Norway, Sweden and Denmark. The political‐democratic discourse focuses on the relationship between law and politics (law as a political instrument); the professional discourse emphasises the relationship between welfare professions and law (law as a professional tool); and the legal discourse draws attention to the importance of legal principles (law as an institution). In Sweden, the process has been strongly politicised and influenced by the political 'war on drugs', resulting in a comprehensive use of coercion towards substance abusers. In Denmark, the process has also been dominated by the political discourse. This process, however, was far less politicised than in Sweden, and no actor has pressed for extensive authority to apply such measures in social policy. In Norway, the process has been strongly influenced by legal discourse emphasising the legal security of the substance abusers, resulting in legislation that is more constricted than in Sweden. In none of these countries have welfare professionals played an active role in pressing for coercive measures in this field of social policy; in fact, they have generally opposed such measures.
Speech as prepared for delivery by Brian Egan, Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State; 110th Annual Meeting of the American Society of International Law Washington, DC, April 1, 2016
Combating domestic violence requires an interdisciplinary approach to solving this serious social problem, with law, legal practice and science playing a very important role. Theoretically, it appears as physical, psychological, sexual and economic violence, while the victims are mostly weaker social groups - women, children and the elderly. Numerous international documents, as well as national regulations in the field of family, criminal and misdemeanor law, provide protection against domestic violence, but statistical indicators do not speak in favor of sufficient effectiveness in their application in practice. The COVID-19 pandemic has in a way further intensified the existing ones, but also created new challenges in the fight against domestic violence. Measures of social isolation, unavailability of competent institutions and general uncertainty are just some of the causes that have contributed to the increase in the number of cases of domestic violence, and the possibility of protecting victims of such treatment.
