Scope Of Defence Research Articles

Abrogation of Article 370 and Its Constitutionality

Article 370 was created with a view that its existence would be temporary. The Ruler of J&K signed the instrument of Accession whereby only three subjects were surrendered i.e. External affairs, Defense and Communications, by the state to the Dominion of India. The relationship between the state of J&K and the Union of India is exceptional. The state enjoys a greater measure of autonomy and the power of the Union of India is restricted, as regards other states. The Union of India is incompetent to declare financial emergency and emergency in case of failing of constitutional machinery with respect to the state of J&K. Only emergency due to war or external aggression can be declared as within the scope of defense as surrendered to Union of India.

Defense Perception in the Geopolitical Scope: An exploratory study through unsupervised machine learning

Regarding military development worldwide, the scope of defense has influenced the economic and technological advancement of many nations, whether to defend their sovereignty or lead military power in the global geopolitical scenario. For the study in question, a database from three others is used, composed of 16 variables and 120 countries, exposing defense figures and economic and social indexes respective to each nation. In this scenario, an exploratory analysis is performed, based on statistical modeling and unsupervised machine learning techniques, exposing correlation points between the variables, listing the most influential and influenced in the evaluation scenario. Using clustering techniques through the K-means algorithm and support of the elbow graph, the possible clusters built for the defense scenario are presented, identifying a favorable number of six groups, thus listing the countries with the greatest similarities between their quantitative variables. Finally, the conclusions of the results found are presented, as well as the limitations of the study and proposals for future studies.

IMPLEMENTASI METODE STEREO VISION PADA ROBOT TEMPUR CIA VERSI N2MR3 DENGAN MENGGUNAKAN DUA KAMERA

In the 4.0 era, which is progressing towards the 5.0 era, many studies have been carried out on visual sensing in robots. Which has a function as monitoring the movement of robots, especially in the scope of defense in the military. Technological developments in military defense equipment play an important role in supporting the defense of the country's territory. One of them is the development of sensing systems on robots, there are many methods to decide the view of enemy targets against weapons. One of them using the triangulation distance measurement method with the help of a stereo vision camera. This method has advantages in the combat robot system, which is that it can reduce people casualties caused by direct weapon contact with the enemy on the battlefield, especially in urban areas, while the principle of this study is to adopt the similarity of the human eye work system, this method requires a least of two images to get information coordinates the target distance to the camera. Then, we can process the distance information to decide the position of the target against the weapon, while the distance function is carried out to place the robot to take measures. From this background, the author wants to build a visual sensing system using stereo vision. Two webcams with 1080HD resolution each are placed parallel to the combat robot. From the images captured by the two cameras, it can observe the comparison gap between the position of the object with the term disparity, while the results of the disparity are usually used to calculate the distance of the real object and each camera has a viewpoint that can be known, so the distance of the object can be calculated by the more method of triangulation. The results show that the error between the real and the detected distance is 5% and that the camera resolution influences reducing the error.

Retributivism and Overpunishment

I argue that a retributive penal philosophy should not be blamed for contributing to our present epidemic of mass incarceration and tendency to over-punish. My paper has three parts. In the first, I make a number of conceptual points about the nature of retributivism that reveal it to have the resources to combat our current crisis. In the second part, I construct desert-based arguments for decriminalizing some offenses that have led too many persons to be punished. In the third part, I suggest that desert favors an expansion in the scope and number of defenses that have the potential to retard the severity of punishment. If my arguments are sound, retributivism should be regarded as part of the solution to our predicament rather than its cause.

The Scope of Defense Against Hostile Takeovers in Poland: Another Argument for the Triviality Thesis

M&A, takeovers, hostile takeovers, acquisition, defence

Retributivism and Over-Punishment

I argue that a retributive penal philosophy should not be blamed for contributing to our present epidemic of mass incarceration and tendency to over-punish. My paper has three parts. In the first, I make a number of conceptual points about retributivism that reveal it to have the resources to combat our current crisis. In the second part, I construct desert-based arguments for decriminalizing some offenses that have led too many persons to be punished. In the third part, I suggest that desert favors an expansion in the scope and number of defenses that have the potential to retard the severity of punishment. If my arguments are sound, retributivism should be regarded as part of the solution to our predicament rather than its cause.

The Significance of Notifying the Legal Qualification of an Offence and Its Revision During Criminal Proceedings for the Defence of the Accused

The article presents issues concerning the legal qualification of a criminal act by the prosecutor, including the public prosecutor, the legal qualification of the fact, and the significance of this procedural act for the defendant’s ability to defend himself effectively. The relationship between the limits of accusation and the limits of examination of a criminal case and the scope of defence were presented. The author discusses the indication of changes in the legal qualification to the suspect or defendant and the court’s authorisation in this respect, with particular emphasis on the regulation provided by Article 399 § 1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Doubts about the application of Article 80 of the Code are discussed as well as its influence on the use of the institution of obligatory defence.

Znaczenie wskazania kwalifikacji prawnej czynu oraz jej zmiany w toku postępowania karnego dla realizacji przez oskarżonego prawa do obrony

The text presents problems concerning the indication by prosecutor, including public prosecuting attorney, of the legal classification of the offence and the importance of this activity for the defendant’s ability to effectively defend himself or herself. It points to the relationship between the scope of indictment and the scope of examination of the case by penal court and the scope of defence. It discusses the issues of notifying the suspect and the defendant of changes made within the legal classification and the court’s powers in this respect, with particular stress on the regulation contained in Article 399 § 1 of the Polish Code of Criminal Procedure. Concerns about the application of Article 80 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and its impact on the use of compulsory defence institutions were also discussed.

MECHANIZM PROCESOWY ‘WAIVER OF TORT’ W ŚWIETLE PRZEMIAN ANGIELSKIEGO ‘COMMON LAW’

THE DOCTRINE OF WAIVER OF TORT IN THE LIGHT OF ENGLISH COMMON LAW TRANSFORMATIONSummary The waiver of tort was a legal fiction that enabled a plaintiff to sue in quasi-contract in lieu of tort. This was a common law doctrine that resulted from the domination of procedural rules over substantive ones. Each of medieval writs initiated peculiar proceedings that had been drafted specially for separate causes of action. As this proceedings differentiated between themselves, plaintiffs attempted to use those writs that restricted the scope of applicable defenses. Hence one of the most popular actions was a quasi-contractual formula named “indebitatus assumpsit for money had and received”. As compared with the tort actions this formula enabled plaintiff to avoid consequences of “actio personalis moritur cum persona” rule and shortened periods of limitation. That is the reason why plaintiffs attempted to apply the quasi-contractual remedy against tortfeasors. The waiver of tort doctrine took its name from the fiction that an injured party waived his rights based on tort and approved all acts performed by a tortfeasor. In consequence the former party was authorized to sue the latter in quasi-contract. As the forms of action had been abolished in late 19th century, lawyers began to perceive “waiver of tort” as a misnomer and started to focus rather on the fact that from one cause of action separate remedies might arise. The change of this attitude was possible due to transformations that took place in common law. The procedural rules ceased to dominate over the substantive ones.

The scope of substantial defenses in objection against enforcement order

The paper examines question of substantial defenses in objection against enforcement order in present Serbian law. Substantial defenses are those related to claim enforced in execution procedure. The problem arises with deficient regulation in Enforcement and Security Act, as only performance of obligation and prolongation are mentioned, but without of determination of time limits of their establishment. After highlighting previous legislation, as well as comparative law, the solution for present situation is offered.

Toward a culture-bound syndrome-based insanity defense?

The American Psychiatric Association's recent inclusion of a Glossary of Culture-Bound Syndromes within DSM-IV draws upon decades of medical anthropological and cultural psychiatric research to afford culture-bound syndromes (CBSs) a newfound legitimacy within professional Western psychiatric nosology. While DSM-IV's recognition of the CBS concept as a category of psychosocial distress has important clinical implications for mental health care practitioners throughout the world, it also has significant legal implications. Given that several CBSs involve a degree of psychological impairment that may satisfy the standard for legal insanity under certain circumstances, this essay focuses on the potential emergence of an insanity defense based on the claim that an immigrant or minority defendant was suffering from a CBS at the time of his or her criminal act. Aimed at initiating interdisciplinary debate over the reification of the CBS concept, the essay discusses the theoretical ambiguity and status of CBSs within professional Western psychiatry, describes what a CBS-based insanity defense might look like, and considers the relevant challenges facing medical anthropologists and cultural psychiatrists, on the one hand, and legal practitioners, on the other. The essay identifies a pressing need for interdisciplinary debate concerning the validity, scope, and viability of CBS-based insanity defenses.

Hartman Hotz Lecture - Race-Based Defenses: The Insights of Traditional Analysis

This article assesses Professor Anthony Alfieri's proposal that ethical sanctions be imposed on defense attorneys who raise claims, such as the rotten social background and rage defenses, that could cause racial harm by pathologizing African-Americans or otherwise creating a negative image of the black community. The first part of the article concludes that requiring attorneys to reject non-frivolous arguments based on their potential for racial harm misconstrues the role of the defense attorney, not just in an adversarial system, which Alfieri clearly disdains, but in any rational system of dispute resolution. The trial judge, not the defense attorney, must be the ultimate arbiter of which arguments are permissible. That conclusion leads to the second part of the article, which explores the application of the rules of evidence to race-based defenses. It turns out that the concerns of responsibility theorists (who focus on the scope of criminal defenses), empiricists (who question the reliability of novel defenses), critical legal scholars (who want courts to recognize and understand outsider groups), and feminists (who, like Alfieri, worry about the effect race-based defenses have on outsider groups) can all be accommodated under traditional evidentiary analysis (i.e., the materiality, probative value, helpfulness and prejudice inquiries, respectively). The determination of whether racialized defenses should be permitted depends upon all of these factors. Professor Alfieri is right to emphasize race-consciousness as an important variable, but wrong to give it dispositive impact.

Lessons from the Anti-Commons: The Economics of Tasini v. New York Times

In most legal systems, Copyright law provides a copyright holder a vast choice of remedies against infringement of his work, including property-type remedies (e.g., injunction to restrain the infringer from violating his rights or even the impoundment and destruction of the unauthorized reproductions of his work) and liability-type remedies (e.g., actions to recover the actual damages and to disgorge the additional profits realized by copyright infringer or to collect statutory damages). In the U.S. all the above choices of remedies are made available by the Copyright Act, which also provides that, in a civil action for copyright infringement, a court may grant temporary and final injunctions to prevent or restrain infringement of a copyright. This paper suggest that a selective use of remedies may be appropriate to minimize the effect of fragmentation and strategic pricing. As a matter of ideal theory, anti-commons losses will result from the imposition of property-type (i.e., injunction) remedies. If copyright owners are given only a damage remedy for the infringement of their work, there is no opportunity for strategic pricing and thus no anti-commons deadweight loss. If liability-type remedies are limited, the infringer has considerable leverage with the copyright owner because he always has the option to use without permission and pay damages. Under a liability rule, the prospective buyer of a copyright license could not be induced to pay more than the cost of his expected liability for copyright infringement. At the limit, a copyright holder can obtain a judicial declaration of his rights, but the defendant can persist in the violation simply by paying damages. In contrast, in the case of property-type (i.e., injunction) protection, a copyright license can be obtained only if the current owner agrees to sell it at the price he demands. Absent such agreement, upon proof of a valid copyright an owner could obtain an injunction to enforce his rights. Under such a regime, strategic pricing of multiple complementary copyrights could lead to substantial dissipation of value. The case of Tasini v. New York Times Co., which the Supreme Court decided in June 2001, attracted media attention and involved celebrities such as film maker Ken Burns because it appeared to pit the rights of authors to protect their creative works against the nation's need to preserve its historical record. In an amicus brief, the American Library Association argued that the above economic rationale should be used in Tasini. Presumably because electronic databases meet some of the Fair Use criteria (e.g., educational purpose), the appropriate solution would be to attach a price to the use of the material rather than prevent access to it altogether. The majority picked up on the argument, citing Campbell when remanding the case, a hint that it would provide appropriate guidance in crafting the ultimate remedy. The lesson to be drawn, therefore, is that legal systems should not change the scope of the fair use defense, or the choice of remedy in case of infringement, even with decreasing transaction costs in an increasingly electronic marketplace. Rather, the doctrine of Fair Use should be a bridge between traditional copyright enforcement and protection in the Digital Age. Leaving both the scope of fair use and the arsenal of copyright remedies unchanged could minimize anti-commons losses; conversely, a reduction in the scope of fair use defenses might have the effect of increasing them. In such case, the use of liability-type remedies in the new domains of copyright protection would help contain the deadweight losses from strategic pricing. As Tasini demonstrates, this scenario is far from theoretical. Viewing property law through the lens of economic analysis highlights the difficulties associated with balancing economic efficiency with the realities of high transaction costs and other situations in which the various actors involved are precluded from reaching an efficient agreement. Understanding the tendency towards entropy and the characteristics of an anti-commons situations sheds light on why the common law has developed certain rules and how these norms, which may be initially puzzling, are in fact effective responses to potentially difficult questions. Courts are beginning to use these concepts as practical tools in resolving cases. As demonstrated by the Tasini case, anti-commons analysis in particular illuminates the way to crafting a judicial remedy that will both be faithful to the letter of the Copyright Act and avoid collateral damage in terms of restricting access to a vast and important store of information. In particular, anti-commons theory demonstrates that the doctrine of Fair Use, far from being close to obsolete, has promise an important bridge between traditional and digital copyright protection.

On the nature and scope of Defence and Peace Economics: A comment

On the nature and scope of Defence and Peace Economics: A comment

On the nature and scope of Defence and Peace Economics: A reply to Judith Reppy's comment

On the nature and scope of Defence and Peace Economics: A reply to Judith Reppy's comment

The New Protectionism: U.S. Trade Policy in Historical Perspective

Until quite recently, cheerful accounts charting the postwar liberalization of American international trade policy were convincing. It was correct to stress the historic shift toward free trade that began with the series of bilateral accords reached under the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act of 1934 (RTAA), accelerated with instatement of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) in 1947 and the Kennedy Round of tariff reductions in the 1960s, and seemed to progress more or less consistently thereafter. But upbeat descriptions appear increasingly inappropriate today, considering the extent to which new trade regulations -orderly marketing agreements (OMAs), voluntary export restraints (VERs), selective procurement, product standards, and buy-American requirements, to name a few have replaced the old tariffs. For the most part, since the disastrous Smoot-Hawley Act of 1930, Congress has stopped short of enacting patently protectionist statutes. But a welter of restrictive devices has accumulated nonetheless, through a political process more circuitous than in the past. The scope of today's defenses against imports is narrower than the all-embracing tariff in effect a half-century ago. Nevertheless, by 1983 they covered nearly onethird of the U.S. market in manufactured goods at an estimated cost of about $70 billion to American consumers.' And the coverage and cost threaten to in-

Criminal Law Defenses: A Systematic Analysis

Unlike many aspects of the criminal law, defenses have not yet been the subject of comprehensive conceptual analysis. The general nature and scope of most defenses have been perpetuated for centuries with little or no question. Current debates commonly focus on whether a particular defense should apply in a particular circumstance, but rarely consider the larger perspective. How do circumstances covered by one defense compare with those of other defenses? Do defenses overlap? If so, will the outcome in identical situations vary with the defense asserted? Should it? Are there gaps between defenses, that is, circumstances in which our common sense of justice suggests that the defendant should be exculpated, yet where no defense applies? Do defenses based on theoretically analogous grounds of exculpation generate analogous results? The general inquiry, which seems never to have been undertaken, is: how does the collection of recognized defenses operate as a system? In sharp contrast to this neglect of defenses, the American criminal law community has examined in detail the full range of offenses and their interrelation. Led by the drafters of the Model Penal Code, states have during the past two decades adopted modern criminal codes that replace a confusing and inconsistent collection of offenses with a thoughtfully organized system. The jumble of offenses in older codes was commonly drafted ad hoc, in response to one highly publicized incident or one anti-crime crusade after another. Modern codes, in contrast, define and arrange all offenses according to a single definitional scheme based on the central elements of the offense: the nature of the interest injured, the extent of the injury, and the culpability of the offender. The result is a significant consolidation of related offenses, few overlaps, few gaps, and a consistency in the organization of offenses that permits the comparisons and classifications necessary for a fair sentencing system. There are, no doubt, many people who believe that defenses defy such systemization. Defenses, it might be argued, are the embodiment of such complex human notions of fairness and morality, tempered by the demands of utility and efficiency, that they are too complex and perhaps too illogical to be reduced to an integrated, comprehensive, and internally consistent system of exculpation. This may well be true, but the complexity and perhaps irrationality of human judgments have not deterred us in other instances, especially in the law, from attempting to devise a principled system that attempts to approximate such judgments. Advances in the behavioral sciences have repeatedly demonstrated that some systemization of human thought is possible, even though it may have absolute limits. While we may not be able to reduce our feelings about exculpation to a precise final form, the level of sophistication in examining, understanding, and setting down the most fundamental principles seems to have fallen far behind our attempts to explicate our notions of justice in other legal areas, including criminal justice matters such as offense definition and procedural fairness. This Article attempts to provide some measure of conceptual organization for criminal law defenses that may foster a more refined system of defenses analogous to the system of offenses and offense definition embodied in most modern criminal codes. Part I of the Article describes a general conceptual framework for such a system; part II discusses the practical implications of the framework.

Statutory Extension of the Scope of Defenses in Civil Libel

Statutory Extension of the Scope of Defenses in Civil Libel