Comparitive politics Article Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Comparitive politics - Article Example Since North Korea has involved itself openly with the induction of nuclear weapons within its arsenal, the people living within the country are thought to be of evil nature and thus a sense of ethnic nationalism has come about with the passage of time as far as North Korea and North Koreans is concerned. Now the same could be avoided if the country faces these kinds of challenges in a head on manner and look to satisfy the world demands in a much more proactive manner than it is carrying out at the present. What this will do is to give a positive image to the world that North Korea is ready and geared up for the challenges ahead and there are not any ethnic nationalistic issues attached with the country in the long run. The challenges that globalization brings with it is that the localized flavor of the country or region is starting to get marred as more and more foreign outlets of expression, work and ethical values are initiating. What this is in essence doing is to pose a marked difference in the thinking mindsets of the people who are related with the globalization regimes as well as the ones who are being brought under the hold of the great globalization debate. China is one such example that has experienced the direct results of globalization since Chinese products have invaded the world markets by storm. They have targeted the South Asian countries in a very attacking manner and the result is that the Chinese authorities the reaping the rich dividends by going global rather than manufacturing for the local Chinese markets. This has opened up their revenue quarters and now the Chinese are thinking global more than ever before. (Kohler, 2003) They have nearly captured all the market domains wi thin South Asia through their strategic planning and it would not be wrong before they make their mark on the global front in a very attacking way. In the coming decades, globalization will shrink the world even further and there would be more opportunities to grow and explore what is on offer or sale for the different markets of the world. This is a fact that the new world order has brought with it and it is here to stay. Similarly, there has been a general perception that globalization means taking jobs away from a region. This is indeed true from a rational standpoint as when company shifts around 100 jobs to Indians, the same number of natives lose their jobs. The offshore movement of jobs has become an issue not only in travel but also in other industries. Two such nations which stand out in this scenario are India and the Philippines that appear to be the most popular locations for setting up call centers as these countries bid a lagoon of cultivated, scholarly English-speaking personnel who will do the same amount of work for much less money. References KOHLER, Horst. (2003). The Challenges of Globalization and the Role of the IMF. International Monetary Fund Word Count:

A Overview of the Grand Canyon Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

A Overview of the Grand Canyon - Research Paper Example How the Grand Canyon came into existence? No one knows. There are abundant guesses. Accept it as the one of the most beautiful area of nature. A number of processes and more than one factor must have contributed to its formation and what one sees in the Grand Canyon presently, is the outcome of the process of evolution over a very long period. â€Å"The most powerful force to have an impact on the Grand Canyon is erosion, primarily by water (and ice) and second by wind. Other forces that contributed to the Canyons formation are the course of the Colorado River itself, volcanism, continental drift and slight variations in the Earth’s orbit which in turn causes variations in seasons and climate†. (The Geology†¦.)Canyon is basically located in a desert. Heat of the sun bakes the soil in the Grand Canyon; it becomes so hard that it cannot absorb water, when rains come. The roots of the plants in the Grand Canyon cannot pierce the hard earth-bed and the root systems are very shallow and they absorb as much water as is possible during rains. These plants are unable to block the process of soil erosion. With no check on the soil and rock in place, during heavy rains flash floods occur with devastating consequences. The flood water carries down the Grand Canyon, everything on its course, spares nothing, and big boulders roll down as if they are pebbles. It assumes the shape of flowing concrete and not water. Those hiking through the side canyons must have the accurate information of weather conditions, to avoid calamities. It is a steep canyon. The ‘sculptor’ of this canyon is the Colorado River in Arizona, USA. It is 277 miles long, the maximum width is 18 miles and its depth is a stunning 6000 ft. It is part of the countless years of the Planet Earth’s geological history, and the River and its tributaries are the architects of this

Sports Exercise Science Paper Essay Example for Free

Sports Exercise Science Paper Essay AussieFit offers two inexpensive membership options starting at basic Fit which is $4.95 a week. Includes Full-club access includes strength, cardio and free weights. Each is designed to fit your schedule and budget. BasicFit plus Includes all â€Å"BasicFit privileges† â€Å"PLUS Aussie-style world-class Group Fitness† including: BodyPump, Cycling, Zumba, and more! From $6.89 a week and for just $5 extra per week, you can add on your choice of the â€Å"Little Nippers Kids’ Club† or â€Å"Unlimited Touch less Tanning.† There are several weights that are available mostly all the basic equipment, the site does not reveal too much information regarding weights. There are also several programs like: â€Å"Zumba Fitness† a Latin-inspired dance-fitness that blends international music, created by Grammy Award-winning producers. â€Å"Body Attack† which is a sports inspired cardio workout that builds strength and stamina. Its a high-intensity program is designed to a wide range of fitness levels and ages. The possibility of using low-impact and low-intensity options throughout the class allows new participants to enjoy the class alongside very fit individual. Also â€Å"Body Combat† which is a unique, Martial Arts-based workout that’s designed for people looking to boost cardio fitness and benefit from total body conditioning. Primarily for fun, this workout is particularly for youthful, sociable individuals who are likely to attend classes with friends. â€Å"Body flow† a workout which combines Yoga, Tai Chi and Pilates and is designed for those looking to improve general fitness, relax and reduce stress, increase mental clearness and to get a sense of well-being. It requires low-level coordination and is particularly popular with the more mature market. There is also â€Å"Body Jam† which puts together the latest dance moves and the hottest new sounds and is designed for the young and young at heart it’s perfect for confident, social people who like to listen to the latest music and try out all the latest trends. Another one is â€Å"Body pump† which is the original barbell class that is for of all ages and fitness levels, and is perfect for anyone looking to get the best possible results in the shortest time. It is favored by those who are bored by an individual weights program and by group fitness people who recognize the need to add some weight training to their workout. Another one is â€Å"Body Step† an energizing step-based cardio workout that uses a height-adjustable step and simple movements on, over and around the step. Including cardio blocks that push fat burning into high gear followed by muscle-conditioning tracks that shape and tone the body, it’s perfect for anyone looking for a fun way to increase fitness. The Website however does not reveal the following; color schemes, music, atmosphere and uniforms. Also absent recreational leagues, clinics, types of sport instruction offered, due to the fact the gym does not have any gymnasiums. The number of employees capacity, number of administrators capacity, is also confidential information. In conclusion, I felt the gym website did a fairly below average job with their website. I felt the website was not well rounded and focused too much on one specific key area being their programs and did not cover all the areas equally. The club website also lacked a lot of information and was really too basic and general to the point of boredom, so I do not think I would attend AusssieFit due to the fact the website lacked creativity, in depth information and diversity with what they have to offer.

Balancing Test in UK Law

Balancing Test in UK Law The Ultimate Balancing Test This chapter will consider how the UK courts must find a balance between the competing Convention rights of Article 8 and Article 10. In the context of their relationship between the privacy of such individuals and the press, as these two essential and fundamental rights frequently come into conflict and must be analysed and balanced against each other. Whilst referring to the ultimate balance as recognised in Strasbourg courts and how it has aided in developing the ultimate balance in UK courts. As such, both rights start off as equal, this can be reflected, for example, in Resolution 1165 of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe 1998, where paragraph 11 specifically mentions that, The Assembly reaffirms the importance of every persons right to privacy, and the right to freedom of expression, as fundamental to a democratic society. These rights are neither absolute nor in any hierarchical order, since they are of equal value in a democratic society.[1] The conflicting rights As can be seen by the evidence presented in the previous chapters, the balance between the right to privacy and freedom of expression is one which has influenced much debate, in Strasbourg and in the UK, and as such, they are often found competing against one another, even though they are of equal value. Incorporated within the debate is the view that both rights are completely contradicting, as privacy is strongly founded upon secrecy whilst expression most always involves exposure, thus this is when friction will almost always be formed between the two Convention rights. Consequently, the friction created by these rights are central to the conflict the courts have been facing, following the incorporation of the HRA and ECHR, much of this friction was formed with the conflicting rights of Article 8 and 10 at the very core. These rights at first glance appear to stand independent, although the expectation of these rights can however become apparent, thus creating the issue of why the right to privacy and freedom of expression are often in conflict. Furthermore, these two rights have arguably been fought most by two parties, the first party, uses Article 8 which gives a person right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.[2] Phillipson identifies that any individual has a right as a human being to have control over what information a person chooses to disclose to another, and that when the government or the media acquire information without your consent, and publish the information, it violates a persons fundamental right to control such information about themselves.[3] Therefore, it makes sense that the second party whom fights for their rights conveyed in Article 10 are most commonly the media, this right states that Everyone has the right to freedom of expression.[ 4] This right includes the freedom to receive and communicate information, thus it would make sense that the second party that fights for their rights are the media as the media focus highly on communicating information to the public, as such, they are quite commonly known as being the public watch dog. [5] Hence, it could be said that the media are therefore obligated to publish what they believe the public want to know, and it is there that the conflict between the right to privacy and freedom of expression arise; when the media publish information that a person or persons wanted to keep private. [6] Harris has expressed the opinion that the balance between the two rights is a grey area in law, and that there will always be tension between the two, however, it needs to remain that way to differentiate between definitively private information and information that some may see as private, but instead may be important to be covered by freedom of expression.[7] It has been stated by Lord Goff that freedom of expression has existed in this country perhaps as long, if not longer, than it has existed in any other country in the world as such, this statement was maintained by Lord Hoffman when he mentioned that A right of privacy may be a legitimate exception to freedom of speech (but) there is no question of balancing freedom of speech against other interests. It is a trump card which always wins.[8] These statements highlight that there once was a strong preference in the courts in favour of freedom of expression. While there is no contrary public interest recognised and protected by the law, the press are free to publish anything they like. Although, when freedom of expression comes into conflict with another interest protected by law, the question of whether there is a sufficient public interest in the publication to justify limitation of the conflicting right comes into play. However, there is, and will always be a strong desire to know the truth, with many agreeing that freedom of expression is fundamental towards a healthy democracy. Although, this freedom can be essential, it can however, come with responsibilities that the media will often disregard. Thus, the right to freedom of expression stops when it infringes on the privacy of those involved unless, by keeping such things private, would cause a concern for society, as such public interest. Yet, the issues of which stories are of public interest is a rather grey area in the UK, partly because the divergence between what the public has a right to know and what the public desires to know. In theory, it can be said that everyone is entitled to both right; right to privacy and right to freedom of expression, as far as they do not infringe on anyone elses rights. Though, this is quite frankly impossible, and as such can only be done by balancing the two rights. The balancing of the two competing rights English courts have been influenced by the balance recognised in the Strasbourg courts, and have attempted to reconcile the fundamental underlying values advanced by the right to privacy and freedom of expression through such legal frameworks, as such the balancing of these two competing rights are clearly demonstrated in countless cases. In executing the ultimate balancing test, the courts consider the claimants right to privacy as expressed in Article 8 of the ECHR, which provides that everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.[9] Equally, the content of the publishers freedom of expressions rights is established from Article 10 of the ECHR, which safeguards the freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.[10] With both rights being qualified, they may be restricted under paragraph two, provided that the interference is prescribe d by the law, and pursues a legitimate aim and what should be well known by now, is that it is necessary in a democratic society and is proportionate response to the aim pursued. The balance as recognised in Strasbourg Privacy actions involve the conflict of two rights, most commonly, freedom of expression. The Article 10 jurisprudence discloses that, even though freedom of expression constitutes once of the essential foundations of a democratic society, a hierarchy of various types of expression have been developed by the ECtHR, which can be recognised in the previous chapter. These can be political speech, artistic expression and commercial expression,[11] as such this is where the conflict begins. The conflict could begin with Article 8, in regards that the State has failed to appropriately protect the applicants right to privacy or it could begin with Article 10, in regards to whether the State has infringed the applicants right to freedom of expression by imposing sanctions aimed at protecting a persons right to privacy.[12] Thus, courts must consider the conflicting rights on the presumption that both Articles are of equal value, rather than considering that the conflicting right is an excep tion to the principal right, as such the Convention ensures that any restriction that is places on either right is closely scrutinised and a balance is achieved between them. The cases before Von Hannover did not endorse the methods of balancing Article 8 and 10, however, following on from this caseit can be recognised that neither Article takes precedence over one another. In the first Von Hannover case, as stated in the previous chapter the court had held that Princess Carolines Article 8 rights had been infringed by the publication of photographs showing her with her children and with her husband. She brought several actions in Germany for an injunction to prevent further publications of the various photographs that were taken, the court however stated that the matter was an event in contemporary society and of general interest to the public. Princess Caroline argued that none of the photographs, regardless of the articles that followed with them debated to such public interest in a democratic society, but were there only to satisfy the curiosity of such a reader. As such, this is important as an individual will be more easily able to establish a reasonable expectation of privacy than say an individual in the public eye. Although, in Von Hannover (No.2)[13]this case involved the publication of a photograph of Princess Caroline and her husband during a skiing holiday, to illustrate the ill health of her father, Monacos Head of State. The Court maintained the position that whilst a private individual unknown to the public may claim particular protection of his or her right to private life, the same is not true of public figures[14] Although, they did modify it definition of public figures to also include persons whom could just be simply well known to the public. Consequently, in line with the courts findings, the press could legitimately report on how the Princes children prepared to accept family duties during the time of the Princes illness, such as going on skiing holiday. In the view of the court, the photos in question, considered in the light of the accompanying articles, did contribute, at least to some degree, to a debate of general interest.[15] Additionally, the photographs themselves were n ot offensive to the extent that their prohibition was justified.[16] The court in this case, emphasised that both Articles are of equal value and the margin of appreciation should be the same in both cases, and as such, they saw fit to develop criteria which other states should follow when considering how to develop a balance between the two rights, these being: Whether the information contributes to a debate of general interest How well known the person concerned is and the subject matter of the report The prior conduct of the individual concerned Content, form and consequences of the publication; and The circumstances in which the photos were taken When applying, the criteria set out above, in the second case, the Court had found that Germany has changed its approach to privacy considering the first Von Hannover judgement, in regards to mentioning that a public interest in being entertained generally was less important than an individuals right to privacy. As such, the courts attempted to narrow the focus when attempting to balance the two equal but competing rights of privacy and freedom of expression. The balancing test as recognised by UK courts Decisions are necessarily fact or case sensitive, given that the Court is required to balance the fundamental rights (right to privacy and freedom of expression) which are often in conflict, the general approach which should be adopted and the principles which apply to these competing rights are now well-established. This main reason for this is that the law is Strasbourg-led. Although the rights do have conflicting aims, their aim was not to confuse the courts in making their rulings but to create a difference between everyones right to privacy whilst allowing them certain freedoms. The approach towards balancing these competing rights will be clearly demonstrated in countless cases. Firstly, it should be mentioned that, Section 12(4) of the HRA enjoins domestic courts to have particular regard to the importance of the Convention right to freedom of expression when they are considering whether to grant relief. Which may indicate that Article 10 is given priority when balancing it against others rights, such as privacy, however, the courts understand that such an interpretation would result in a conflict between Article 8 and 10, thus lacking with the consistency with the Convention rights. Consequently, the case of Douglas v Hello! Ltd,[17] Lord Justice Sedley, recognised that in order to achieve such compatibility with the Convention, when balance the two rights, courts would have to treat the two rights as having equal value, The European Court of Human Rights has always recognised the high importance of free media of communication in a democracy, but its jurisprudence does not and could not consistently with the Convention itself give Article 10(1) the presumptive priority which is given. [à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦] Everything will ultimately depend on the proper balance between privacy and publicity in the situation facing the court.[18] The Campbell case refined this balancing test, as the House of Lords were face with conflict between privacy and freedom of expression when a tabloid took and published photographs of a supermodel as she exited a Narcotics Anonymous meeting the house was divided in the result with a narrow 3 -2 majority deciding that her privacy rights ought to prevail over freedom of expression in the circumstances of this case. The House of Lords considered what type of information was regarded as confidential and stated that there must be some interest of a private nature that a claimant wished to protect and that the test is whether a person place in similar circumstances would find the disclosure offensive. [19] Fenwick and Phillipson have termed this approach to proportionality, the parallel analysis as it requires the court to consider whether the justifications in favour of protecting speech support the limit on privacy and then to consider, whether the justification in favour of privacy sup port the limit proposed on freedom of expression.[20] Without this parallel analysis, there is a danger that one right would prevail. However, the courts have been conducting various tests to determine the privacy of such certain information, long before Campbell founded the balancing exercise which the UK courts now use. Formerly, a limited right of privacy was established in the case of Coco v AN Clark Engineers Ltd[21] which came under the already established right of breach of confidence. The above approach in Campbell has subsequently been endorsed, and as such, it has been established in the UK that not one Article is supposed to take superiority over the other, as Lord Steyn summarised in the case of Re S (A Child),[22] First, neither article has precedence as such over the other. Secondly the values under the two articles are in conflict, an intense focus on the comparative importance of the specific rights being claimed in the individual case is necessary. Thirdly, the justification for interfering with each right must be taken into account. Finally, the proportionality test must be applied to each. For convenience I will call this the ultimate balancing test.[23] The approach towards balancing these competing rights can be clearly demonstrated in countless cases in the UK courts and through Strasbourg, which become more apparent when the extent of which public interest exists for the disclosure of private information. The case law produced after the introduction of the HRA is ever expanding, with recent concerns coming to light over the issue that the courts have developed a law of privacy and made the necessary balance between the two rights in each case, rather than the Parliament. [24] Thus, these following cases explore the progressively divergent approaches the courts have taken in interpreting and applying the legal tests that have been established. How the courts use the balancing test The decisions made in the cases of Campbell, Douglas and Von Hannover are considered landmark with the considerations that have occurred in the area of privacy over the years. As these cases strengthened the recognition of privacy and re-defined the notion of public interest to exclude mere curiosity and unhealthy interest in individuals lives.[25] It is however, what was decided in these cases that have influenced the way court approach cases that concern balancing the right to privacy with freedom of expression. Consequently, the courts must now balance the two conflicting interests by applying the principles mentioned above to the facts of the case, whilst considering the legitimacy of the expectation of privacy, the level of intrusion and the importance of any public interest in publication. Which allows for the UK courts to mirror the principles that have been laid down by the ECHR and ensure that any interference with privacy and freedom of expression are necessary and proporti onate.[26] Prior to the introduction of the HRA, the right to privacy was relatively underdeveloped, however, much has changed as it can be said that the protection of private lives and private information is one of the fastest-developing areas of the law as judges use the Human Rights Act [27] An early case of the balancing act after the introduction of the HRA was in A v B[28], where the Court held that a claimants public profile generates legitimate public interest in his or her personal life, which strengthens the medias freedom of expression claims. As such, A v B defined public figures as all those who play a role in public life, surrounding all persons in the political, social, economic and artistic world.[29] The Court held that the media have elevated freedom of expression claims when reporting on public figures, the court further mentioned that; A public figure is entitled to a private life. The individual, however, should recognise that because of his public position he must expect and accept that his actions will be more closely scrutinised by the media. Even trivial facts relating to a public figure can be of great interest to readers and other observers of the media.[30] This case suggested that the public interest in such publications extends to private information about various public figures to which can be of curiosity to the public interest. Though, the courts can have very different views on the approach to the balancing of competing rights. For example, in the case of Mosley v News Group Newspapers[31], where the court determined that the right of the claimant was protected by Article 8. In this case, the defendant published a story with the title F1 BOSS HAS SICK NAZI ORGY WITH 5 HOOKERS which was accompanied with pictures, and had been made available on their website with an added video, which concerned Mosley and five other women engaged in sadomasochistic sexual activities and role play.[32] The article involved suggested that these sessions had a Nazi theme and that the role playing had mocked the way that Holocaust victims had been treated whilst in concentration camps. The footage of the session was recorded by one of the women by a hid den camera that was supplied by NGN. As mentioned earlier, when these two rights are in conflict, the court will not give an automatic trump statute on one right over the other. Therefore, the court had the difficult task of balancing the interests of Mosleys right to privacy with the interests of NGNs right to freedom of expression. The court decided that since they could not find evidence to suggest that he mocked victims of the holocaust, there was no interest to the public. However, the court stated that if they had published the story without the photographs and video, they would have allowed for freedom of expression to prevail over right to privacy. Thus, this case confirms that the courts are willing to protect an individuals right to privacy when freedom of expression is not justifiable. The court of Appeal in the case of Murray v Express Newspapers[33]followed in the steps of Von Hannover in holding that routine activities carried out in public could arguably attract a reasonable expectation of privacy. Whilst holding that leisure activities, such as a cafà © expedition could be characterised as part a persons private recreation time.[34] Although the Court failed to define what types of activities would qualify as recreation time and instead stated that the enquiry is highly contextual. As such, the Court further stated given that the publicity of such activities would adversely affect family recreation time in the future, the Court held that the claimant had a reasonable expectation of privacy. The way this case was approached by the Courts signals that a potential separation from the decision that was laid out in Campbell, where it was held that privacy law did not protect innocuous public activities.[35] In the case of Weller, Judge Dingemans did not expressly address the strain between the Von Hannover and A v B plc, which offered little to clarification if the UK courts approach to public figures under the misuse of private information. However, in approaching the balancing test, Judge Dingemans adopted the Von Hannover conception of a debate of general interest,[36] he considered that the photographs did not contribute to a debate of public interest, despite the considerable public profile of the childrens parents. As such, given that the photographs would have satisfied the public interest definition in A v B, given that there is a strong curiosity in Wellers family life, and as such Weller employed a more confined definition of general interest in line with the ECtHR. Although, Dingemans concern for the consequences of prohibiting the publication on the newspaper industry, suggests that the Court doesnt fully adopt the approach set out in Von Hannover. However, Dingemans stated that the photographs in question should be given freedom of expression weight as the is a public interest in having a thriving and vigorous newspaper industry [37] and the ability to publish such things due to public interest was considered important to the commercial wellbeing of the media, as previously stated the medias role is to act as a public watchdog. However, despite acknowledging the distinction in this argument, Dingemans considered that the medias interest did not outweigh the childrens right to privacy in the Wellers case.[38] The recent case and much anticipated case of PJS[39]where a famous figure won the right not to be publicly named in England and Wales over an alleged marital threesome, also known as a super injunction, despite his identity being known elsewhere.At first, the interim injunction was refused, however, the Court of Appeal allowed an appeal and restrained publication of the relevant names and such details.[40] Despite steps taken by PJSs solicitors to remove the story from the internet, despite their best endeavours, the court concluded that there remains a significant body of internet material identifying those involved by name.[41] Thus, NGN applied to Court of Appeal to then set aside the injunction as the information was already in the public domain and the injunction was no longer fulfilling its purpose, and interfered unjustly with their Article 10 rights of freedom of expression.[42] However, the Supreme Court reinstated the injunction saying that without a proven public interest in the content, there is no free-standing public interest in publication. The court cant sanction for one media outlet what it believes, on balance, will be deemed unlawful at trial, even if others have published the material already. As such, Mance mentioned; For present purposes, any public interest in publishing such criticism [of PJS] must, in the absence of any other, legally recognised, public interest, be effectively disregarded in any balancing exercise and is incapable by itself of outweighing such article 8 privacy rights as the appellant [PJS] enjoys. (Emphasis added)[43] Rea argues that this case points out the dilemma courts face daily, especially in the digital age, as such media on the interest cannot be controlled as largely as print or television media.As such these cases illustrate the balancing test in action, and how to courts use that to prevent one right from prevailing the other. References Thompson K, Balancing Privacy and Free Speech: A Critique Of English Privacy Law Under The Human Rights Act (MJur, Durham Law School 2013) http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/9398/> Horsey K and Rackley E, Kidners Casebook Of Torts (12th edn, Oxford University Press 2015) British Broadcasting Corporation, The Public Interest, The Media And Privacy (BBC 2002) accessed 16 February 2017 Harris C, Charlotte Harris: Freedom Of Speech And Privacy Are Naturally At Odds With Each Other. Can You Balance Freedom Of Speech And Privacy? (Mishcon Graduates, 2017) accessed 23 February 2017 Tibbetts G, Max Mosley Admits Passion For Sadomasochistic Sex (Telegraph.co.uk, 2008) accessed 26 February 2017 Phillipson G, Why Should We Have A Right To Privacy? (BBC Religion Ethics, 2013) accessed 21 February 2017 Dyer C, Celebrities To Clarify Privacy Law (the Guardian, 2006) accessed 24 February 2017 [1] Kirsty Horsey and Ericka Rackley, Kidners Casebook Of Torts (12th edn, Oxford University Press 2015) at para 138. [2] The Human Rights Act 1998, art. 8 (1). [3] Gavin Phillipson, Why Should We Have A Right To Privacy? (BBC Religion Ethics, 2013) accessed 21 February 2017. [4] The Human Rights Act 1998, art. 10 (1). [5] Thorgeirson v Iceland [1992]14 EHRR 843 at para 63. [6] British Broadcasting Corporation, The Public Interest, The Media And Privacy (BBC 2002) 19-20 accessed 16 February 2017. [7] Charlotte Harris, Charlotte Harris: Freedom Of Speech And Privacy Are Naturally At Odds With Each Other. Can You Balance Freedom Of Speech And Privacy? (Mishcon Graduates, 2017) accessed 23 February 2017. [8] R v Central Independent Television plc [1994] Fam 192 at 203. [9] The Human Rights Act 1998, art. 8 (1). [10] The Human Rights Act 1998, art. 10 (1).

Database Management Essay -- Technology, Computer Softwares, Data

What is a database management system? Discuss each of the five important software components of a database management system. Data Base Managements System (DBMS) is a computer software program installed on a system hard drive that catalog, retrieve, and run queries on data. It provides ways for data to be altered or removed by users or other programs. There are several different types of database management systems that exist that were created for the proper control of databases for specific purposes. The five software components of a database managements system are DBMS engine, data definition subsystem, data manipulation subsystem, applications generation subsystem, and data administration subsystem (Cummings, 2010). Database management systems engine is the central component of the DBMS it stores and retrieves data it accepts logical request from multiple other subsystems and transform them into its physical equivalent. The DBMS engine collects logical requests for data users and issues physical input/output requests to the computer operating system. The data requested is gathered from physical storage and while the data remains in memory, it is managed by the DBMS engine. Data definition subsystems create and maintain data dictionary. Define structure of the files within the Data Base. Its logical structure must be defined prior to entering information and any time information is entered or deleted the data definition subsystem must be used. Field name, type, form, default value, validation rule, is an entry required, and can there be duplicates are examples of logical properties (Cummings, 2010). Data Manipulation Subsystem is used to add, change and delete information in a database. There is software in the ... ... performance products. Some examples is nanotube which is have been added to the frames of tennis racquets and gulf clubs. Nanotubes are some of the toughest materials known to exist to man. Since these tubes are microscopic, millions can be added to the tennis racquet to make it strong in order to give tennis players more control and power. Medicine is another area in which nanotechnology transforming. With the medical field dealing with things on the smallest level, the small nano devices are being developed to enter the body. An example is Nano robot which is a computer-controlled robotic device used to treat and eradicate diseases. Nanotechnology differ from traditional manufacturing in which traditional manufacture take a large item and break it down to its smallest form, nanotechnology starts at the smallest form and build up (Cummings, 2010).

Essay --

In the novel, To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee, Mayella Ewell misleads the constituents of Maycomb about Tom Robinson because she knew the people would not approve of her actions of advancing on a man of different color. This event vividly explains the consequential aftermath of one race having feelings for another in the times of the Great Depression, specifically a white woman having feelings for an african american. She was afraid of what the townspeople would do to her, which was the main reason Mayella lied to the town of Maycomb. Mayella’s emotions gave away that she was lying during the trial. When Mayella was called to the stage, she said to Atticus "I got somethin' to say an' then I ain't gonna say no more. That nigger yonder took advantage of me an' if you fine fancy gentlemen don't wanta do nothin' about it then you're all yellow stinkin' cowards, stinkin' cowards, the lot of you. Your fancy airs don't come to nothin'—your ma'amin' and Miss Mayellerin' don't come to nothin', Mr. Finch-". If Mayella Ewell was really innocent, she wouldn’t have been as dramatic as she was while pleading her case. Mayella most likely would have told the truth with no wavering emotions. When Mayella was called to the stand she did this, â€Å"‘Him,’ she said, pointing at Atticus.† Mayella was afraid of Atticus during the trial because of the way he got her father, Bob Ewell, to give vital information to Tom’s benefit. She would not have been afraid of Atticus if she hadnâ€℠¢t known he could get the truth out of her, too. If Mayella had remained calm during the trial, she might have seemed a lot less guilty. Mayella Ewell did not admit to the truth because she was afraid of what the town would perceive of her actions. Atticus implied that... ...a white man harming a black man, the black man would be guilty of assaulting the white man. Thusly, there was little to no chance that the jury would believe anything Tom Robinson said. Mayella used the town’s racism to her advantage to get out of her sticky situation. In conclusion, Mayella Ewell lied to the citizens of Maycomb about Tom Robinson because she knew the people would not approve of her actions of advancing on a man of different color. She swore on the Bible to tell the truth, but failed to do so and told everyone Tom Robinson raped her. Even though Mayella clearly made that up and there wasn’t a substantial amount of evidence to prove Tom was guilty, he was still charged for raping Mayella because his skin color was different from hers. The moral of this event is to never judge someone by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.

Discuss the Extent to Which the Hong Kong Legal System

1. Introduction Hong Kong is an exceptional region: a previous British-ruled colony constituted of a majority of Chinese and now a special administrative region on the Chinese soil practising â€Å"One Country, Two System†. Despite the transfer of sovereignty, Hong Kong continues to enjoy a relatively competitive economy and stable environment as compared with other regions in East Asia. It was not until recently that that the discussion over protection of minorities rights[1] attracted more public concern within the territory. So what is it hiding behind the veil of the apparent prosperity in the society?What and who are being ignored by the general public or the â€Å"majority† in the society? This article is going to discuss some aspects whether the rights of minorities are being sufficiently protected by the public institutions and the provisions of legislations and conclude with suggestions to secure minority rights in Hong Kong. 2. History When the British took ov er Hong Kong in 1840s, it brought in the  Brigade of Gurkhas. Western investors as well as people from regional countries migrated since then because of the stability in Hong Kong, which eventually developed into a hub where East meets West[2].Blending incoming ideas from the West into the traditional ideas from China, the product is a society interwoven with peoples of different traditions and beliefs towards a certain issues, for instance, customs, religions and, more controversially, sexual orientation. Despite the establishment of Legal Aid Department, Equal Opportunities Commission and other social institutions, there exist reported cases of discrimination against the minority groups in work and at school, in public and private sectors, let alone many more unreported.Are the minority being well protected? 3. Performance of the Protection of the Minority There are different bodies in Hong Kong that are devoted to protecting the rights of the minority groups. International Huma n Rights Regimes and Basic Law list out what rights are to be protected; other local Legislations deliver obligations of people not to discriminate against others; public and social institutions take a more active role in making Hong Kong a city which do not tolerate discrimination[3]. 1. International Human Rights RegimeDifferent Human Rights Regimes such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (â€Å"ICCPR†), the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (â€Å"ICESCR†) as applied in Hong Kong shall remain in force. Others like the Covenant on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (â€Å"CEDAW†) is also binding on Hong Kong. 1. The ICCPR The ICCPR guarantees some basic civil and political rights. There are provisions that especially protect the minorities such as ethnic and sexual minorities from being discriminated against.It recognizes the state's duty to guarantee the rights protected by the IC CPR without distinction of any kind[4]. It guarantees the equality of all persons before the law and equal protection of the law against discrimination on various grounds[5] and the rights enjoyed by minorities shall not be denied[6]. 2. The ICESCR The ICESCR recognizes economic, social and cultural rights enjoyed by every human beings. For instance it guarantees the rights of everyone to education[7], so discrimination on grounds like race nor sex on admission policy of schools is to be prohibited. 3.The CEDAW The CEDAW promotes equality between men and women. The Government of Hong Kong submitted periodic reports under CEDAW to detail the protective measures to women in Hong Kong. A Women's Commission is also set up to deal with interest of women in society. The society has quite successfully observe these international treaties and by enforcing these provisions in the treaties, Hong Kong fulfils its duty as required by the treaties to recognize the rights of women, ethnic and sex ual minorities and to eliminate discrimination on grounds of sex, races and other status. . The Basic Law The Basic Law brings into force the rights guaranteed by the Joint Declaration. It also implements provisions of the ICCPR and ICESCR through Article 39. It guarantees rights for some minorities, for instance, rights of the indigenous inhabitants of the New Territories[8]. The supremacy of Basic Law and its ability to override other laws in Hong Kong that are inconsistent with it[9] assure the minority groups that they would not be deprived of their basic rights.The case Secretary for Justice v Yau Yuk Lung Zigo and Another[10] demonstrated the supremacy of the Basic Law: the law that contravenes the provision of rights (of the homosexual in this case) guaranteed by the Basic Law would be declared unconstitutional. The Basic Law has shown an unequivocal intention to protect rights of every residents including the minority of course. 3. Local Legislation The Bill of Rights Ordina nce (â€Å"BOR†) Enacted since the Tiananmen Square Incident, BOR incorporates the ICCPR to strengthen the regime of rights.The BOR also brought about legal reform where laws are revised to ensure compatibility with BOR. Anti-discrimination Ordinances Legislator Anna Wu introduced the Equal Opportunities Bill[11] (â€Å"EOB†) in 1994 but Governor Chris Patten declined to give permission to it. Instead the Sex Discrimination Ordinance (â€Å"SDO†), Disability Discrimination Ordinance and later Family Status Discrimination Ordinance and Racial Discrimination Ordinance are introduced by the government. These anti-discrimination laws are mainly to prohibit discrimination on respective grounds. 4. Public Institutions 1.Legal Aid Department (â€Å"LAD†) Although the LAD is not devoted to eliminating discrimination in the society, it assists parties being discriminated against to seek for justice provided that the party is qualified for legal aid. That said LAD also protects minority rights in the sense that it helps minorities who cannot afford to bring a legal action when they need to. Through implementing the Ordinary Legal Aid Scheme and Supplementary Legal Aid Scheme, LAD caters the needs for minority groups which have different financial resources[12] and sustains the people's rights to access to Court. . Equal Opportunities Commission (â€Å"EOC†)[13] Although the EOC is an institution delegated to promote equality and empowered by law to take action against those discriminate against others, it has taken a limited role in that sense[14]. The EOC has taken legal action, by means of representation, appearing as amicus, starting a litigation in just about half of the claims under the anti-discrimination laws[15]. As a result many claimants who cannot afford the legal costs thus cannot seek for equality and justice.Even where the claimant first tries conciliation but fails to resolve the dispute, there is no warranty that they w ould get legal assistance from the EOC. This makes it possible for the respondent, who is usually a bigger enterprise or a more powerful body than the claimant, to reach a settlement under duress outside the court with the complaint to prevent the publication of the dispute in the course of litigation. Also the EOC would not disclose the information of the claims such as the identity of the parties and the outcome.The perpetrators might continue their wrongful conduct as they are not reported nor publicized. On the other hand, the EOC has adopted a restricted role in eliminating sexual orientation discrimination. Such cases are not unheard of and persistently exist[16]. Chairman of EOC responded but merely explained that the existing anti-discrimination laws do not pertain to discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation discrimination. But the Korean Human Rights Commission (â€Å"KHRC†) has taken a far more active approach than the EOC, urging the Korean Government to pass legislation on this nature.The EOC should have considered the approach of KHRC and revised its own policy if not directly copy what KHRC has done. 5. Common Law model As Hong Kong practises a common law system, the cases concerning discrimination against minority groups become precedent for and are binding on later cases. The following are a few examples of how discrimination against minorities rights is treated in Courts of Hong Kong. 1. Secretary for Justice v Yau Yuk Lung Zigo and Another[17]. Homosexual buggery committed otherwise than in private has been criminalized by the Crime Ordinance under Section 118F[18], at least before his case. The relevant section (s. 118F) was held unconstitutional by the Court of Final Appeal in this case on the ground that it constitutes violations to both Article  25 of the Basic Law and Article  22 of BOR[19]. The outcome of this case reasserts the equality of all Hong Kong residents before the Law. 2. Secretary for Justice and Others v Chan Wah and Others[20] In this case, it is held that the exclusion of non-indigenous residents and women from voting and participating an election is discriminatory and violates the BOR and SDO[21].This case has also reminded the public that the society of Hong Kong endeavours to eliminate discrimination even in customary and traditional practices. 3. EOC v Director of Education[22] In this case, the operation of Secondary School Places Allocation System is held to be amounted to discrimination against certain pupils by sex under Section 5(1) of the SDO. This case demonstrates the principle of substantive equality that should be achieved in Hong Kong. 4. W v. Registrar of Marriages[23] In this case, it is held that transsexuals could not marry a person of the same biological sex.I would agree that the judgment is not discriminatory because not all differential treatments constitute discrimination. Only those without a justifiable aim or those whose aim does not justify its means constitute a discrimination[24]. When there is no indication on whether the society is ready to genuinely accept the transsexuals, it is reasonable and justifiable to adopt a conservative approach. The first three cases showed the determination of the society, especially the Courts, in striving to eliminate discrimination within the territory, although the determination might be weak at times.But with these cases as precedents, equality would more likely be done in the fields where the precedents are concerned. 4. Conclusion Despite occasional inability of the EOC to cope with the discriminatory cases; despite cases where discrimination against others persists; despite voicing concerns over issues relating to same-sex relationships and rights to education, Hong Kong's legal system has fulfilled its basic duty to secure minority rights in Hong Kong.We can see that International Human Rights Regimes remain in force; legislations are introduced to prohibit discrimination based on the grounds of sex, race, colour or other status; public institutions are set up to transform Hong Kong into a society which preserves equality. All these has demonstrated the efforts of the Government, the public institutions and the Public in protecting minority rights. But facing claims to further protect the minorities, the fundamental way with a view to building Hong Kong into a society where minority would be well-respected is to resort to education.Only by correcting the mindset of people can minority rights be fully protected. ———————– [1] Puja Kapai argued in her article that to be committed to equality within the society, same-sex marriage shall be included in the purview of the Domestic Violence Ordinance. See The Same Difference: Protecting Same-Sex Couples Under The Domestic Violence Ordinance, (2009) 4(1) Asian Journal of Comparative Law, Article 9, pp. 237-269. Kelley Loper suggested in her article that it is necessa ry to have legal reform in order to ensure inclusive education and substantive equality.See Equality and inclusion in education for persons with disabilities: Article 24 of the convention on the rights of persons with disabilities and its implementation in Hong Kong, Hong Kong Law Journal, 2010, v. 40 n. 2, p. 419-447 [2] Non-Chinese citizens constitute more than 8 percent of the Hong Kong's population. See http://www. nationsencyclopedia. com/economies/Asia-and-the-Pacific/Hong-Kong. html [3] Puja Kapai, â€Å"The Hong Kong Equal Opportunity Commission: Calling for a New Avatar† (2009)HKLJ P. 40 [4] Article 2(1), ICCPR [5] Article 26, ICCPR. It guarantees effective protection against discrimination on any ground such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. [6] Article 27, ICCPR [7] Article 13, ICESCR [8] Article 40, Basic Law [9] Article 11, Basic Law [10] (2007) 10 HKCFAR 335, dated 17 July 2007 [11] The EOB sought to prohibit discrimination on grounds like sex, race, disability, age and sexuality. 12] The Supplementary Legal Aid Scheme provides legal assistance to the â€Å"sandwich class† whose financial resources exceed HK$260,000 (the upper limit allowed under the Ordinary Legal Aid Scheme) but not HK$1,300,000. [13] The EOC is an independent body which promotes rights and eliminates discrimination of citizens under the anti-discrimination laws in Hong Kong, receives and looks into complaints from the society and helps to conciliate to resolve disputes and provides legal assistance to complaints in need when the dispute cannot be resolved by conciliation. 14] For those who seek for legal assistance in their cases, over half of the requests are turned down by the EOC. See Kapai, P â€Å"Calling for a New Avatar† (n 3 above) P. 343 [15] Kapai, P â€Å"Calling for a New Avatar† (n 3 above) P. 342 [16] Such as the turning away of homosexual c ouples in love motels, Criminalizing homosexual buggery. See Kapai, P â€Å"Calling for a New Avatar† (n 3 above) P. 350 [17] See Yau Yuk Lung, (n 10 above) 18] Section 118F of the Crime Ordinance states that † A man who commits buggery with another man otherwise than in private shall be guilty of an offence† [19] Art 22 of BOR provides that â€Å"the law shall †¦ guarantee to all persons †¦ effective protection against discrimination on any ground such as †¦ sex, †¦ or other status. † Chief Justice Li held that sexual orientation is within the phrase â€Å"other status†. [20] [2000] 4 HKC 429, dated 22 December 2000 [21] Against Art. 21 and 26 of the BOR and s. 35 of SDO [22] [2001] 2 HKLRD 690, dated 22 June 2001 [23] [2010] HKCFI 55 [24] See The  Belgian Linguistic case (No 2)  (1968)  1 EHRR 252