ARTICLE<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Europe\u2019s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) took effect on May 25, 2018. Article 25, titled, \u201cData Protection by Design and by Default,\u201d purports to incorporate the concept of \u201cprivacy by design\u201d into European data protection law. This Article challenges that common presumption. Although privacy by design is not a new doctrine, having been the subject\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n
21 Apr 2021<\/p>\n\n\n\n
ARTICLE<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Faced with the challenges posed by disruptive technologies and innovations, many countries have adopted different regulatory approaches, institutional structures, and norms to maximize benefits and mitigate risks. Among such regulatory endeavors, the regulatory sandbox, first adopted by the United Kingdom in its financial sector, stands out as a prominent mechanism to strike a balance between\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n
26 Oct 2021<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The following is a written adaptation of the opening speech for the 2019 Symposium. To the Journal\u2019s editorial board, the presenters, commentators, audience, and most importantly, the sponsors, I hope you find inspiration in the Symposium\u2019s presentations. The articles presented in this issue touch on important aspects of some very difficult problems\u2014 problems that grow\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n
22 Apr 2021<\/p>\n\n\n\n
ARTICLE<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Blockchain technology has the potential to change the way corporations are managed and how they function. A system that offers greater decentralization and ability for shareholders to more actively and accurately engage in decision-making processes will be fundamental for modern corporate governance. We observe that shareholders in recent years have become more active and interested\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n
12 Apr 2021<\/p>\n\n\n\n
On March th 2020, President Donald Trump retweeted a tweet referring to the COVID-19 virus as \u201cChinese Virus.\u201d This sparked a massive, worldwide response both for and against the term. It has led to the increased use of \u201c#Chinesevirus\u201c on Twitter and sparked significant anti-China sentiments. It has not only affected US-China trade relations but\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n
22 Nov 2020<\/p>\n\n\n\n
ARTICLE<\/p>\n\n\n\n
By: Suchita Uppal and Zaid Wahidi<\/p>\n\n\n\n
1 Oct 2020<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This Article focuses on a case study of Colombia\u2019s judicial system by discussing the scope and competence of courts when facing legal revolutions. The term \u201crevolution\u201d is defined narrowly to mean the process of altering an existing constitutional system\u2014either through constitutional amendments, or outside of such process\u2014in order to achieve legal and social transformations. With\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n
1 Oct 2020Older posts<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n Toolkit or Tinderbox? The collapse of justice might manifest metaphorically. For example, in November 1985, a guerrilla group frustrated by the government\u2019s violation of a ceasefire stormed Colombia\u2019s Palace of Justice and held all twenty-five of the nation\u2019s Supreme Court justices\u2014along with hundreds of civilians\u2014hostage. In March 2017, more than thirty years later, judges and\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n Oct 2021<\/p>\n\n\n\n Faced with the challenges posed by disruptive technologies and innovations, many countries have adopted different regulatory approaches, institutional structures, and norms to maximize benefits and mitigate risks. Among such regulatory endeavors, the regulatory sandbox, first adopted by the United Kingdom in its financial sector, stands out as a prominent mechanism to strike a balance between\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n Oct 2021<\/p>\n\n\n\n Despite the enormous development of international criminal justice after the Cold War, disappointment with it has never been greater. The International Criminal Court (ICC) faces criticism from all sides. The facts speak for themselves: in nearly twenty years, and having spent approximately \u20ac1.5 billion, the ICC secured only three core criminal convictions. At the same\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n Oct 2021<\/p>\n\n\n\n Courts have emerged as vital policymaking bodies of the People\u2019s Republic of China. Chinese courts do not only adjudicate individual cases; they also operate as quasi-legislative bodies by promulgating interpretations on a wide range of fields and subjects. These judicial interpretations\u2014issued in the absence of a live case or controversy\u2014 have come to acquire the\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n Oct 2021<\/p>\n\n\n\nToolkit or Tinderbox? When Legal Systems Interface Conflict<\/a><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Christie S. Warren<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
The Diffusion of the Sandbox Approach to Disruptive Innovation and Its Limitations<\/a><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Chang-Hsien Tsai, Ching-Fu Lin & Han-Wei Liu<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
Transitional Justice Cascades<\/a><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Aleksandar Marsavelski & John Braithwaite<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
Judicial Legitimation in China<\/a><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Benjamin Minhao Chen & Zhiyu Li<\/h4>\n\n\n\n