Home

These are thresholds not triggers: that a trial implicates a national security interest does not automatically justify a wholly secret trial; instead, the courts may exclude the public “from all or part of a trial” as required by the particular rationale by which publicity would imperil national security in the case at hand. 9. (...) The purpose underpinning article 14, paragraph 1 explains why publicity must be more than formal. In order for every organ of government and every member of the public to have at least the opportunity to consider whether punishment is being imposed in a fair and non-discriminatory manner, the administration of justice must be transparent. It defeats the purpose of the publicity element of due process for judgements to be “made public” by filing them away in courthouses where they can, in theory, be paged through by citizens.

Invites the specialized agencies to give full publicity, through all media, to the question of Nami- bia and to the conditions prevailing in the Territory to which their respective spheres of competence are related; 11. (...) Requests the Secretary-General to take the necessary steps to intensify publicity relating to Nami- bia, and to issue a series of United Nations commemo- rative postage stamps to publicize the direct respon- sibility of the United Nations for Namibia; 20.

Reporting, intelligence and information release systems for public health emergencies are in place. The competent health administrative departments at or above provincial level are responsible for releasing information on public health emergencies to the public. (...) Related handbooks and teaching materials, such as The Handbook for Citizen Safety, have been issued, and the knowledge on the protection against bioterrorist attacks has been included in school education and publicity plans. Training programmes on preventing nuclear, biological and chemical terrorism and contingency drills in response to bioterrorist attacks and public health emergencies for professionals have been organized to enhance their awareness and capability. (...) Strengthened Measures on Big International Events To ensure the health safety and security of the participants of the Beijing 2008 Olympic and Paralympic Games, and the Shanghai 2010 World Expo, China further strengthened measures on prevention of and emergency response to bio-terrorism and public health emergencies. (A) Prevention and Control Measures Reinforced infectious diseases surveillance and preparedness for medical care and rescue; Strengthened health surveillance in public areas, and monitoring and supervision of food, cosmetics and water supplies for special events; Intensified prevention efforts and security inspections at key facilities in the specific time period; Improved biosafety and biosecurity of laboratories handling pathogenic microorganisms; Enhanced inspection and quarantine of inbound personnel, materials and mails; Information release and publicity of health security; Issued The Handbook for Citizens on Protection against terrorist attacks.

National Preparedness of Response to Public Health Emergencies and National Preparedness of Response to Medical Rescue on Public Emergencies were promulgated in 2005, which stipulates the functions and responsibilities of relevant competent authorities responding to public health emergencies, and the classification, surveillance, reporting, emergency response, and damage control of such emergencies. (...) The Chinese Government made unremitting efforts in improving law enforcement capacity through adopting best practices for law enforcement and educating and training law enforcement personnel. The publicity of relevant laws and regulations has been enhanced through organizing regular training courses and lectures and distributing BWC/MSP/2007/MX/WP.17 page 9 pamphlets, with a view to helping the enterprises rigorously implement relevant laws and regulations and run their business accordingly. (...) Thirdly, a national implementation mechanism with clear division of responsibility and effective coordination should be enhanced and the law enforcement capacity improved. Fourthly, the publicity of relevant policies and laws should be enhanced with a view to raising the awareness and self-discipline of relevant enterprises, research and education institutions and personnel.

Requests all Administering Members which have not done so to give the fullest publicity in the Non-Self- Governing Territories under their administration to all offers of study and training facilities made by Member States; 4.

The Director of the Executive Office for Transparency and Protection of Health Rights believes publicity should be given to the risks and consequences of trafficking in persons and the damage it can cause to physical and mental health, thereby preventing the attainment of the highest levels of physical, mental and social well-being. (...) The representative of the Public Prosecutor’s Office notes that, as part of her Office’s policy, the Public Prosecutor’s Office Strategic Plan on Children and Young Persons 2004-2010 was approved by decision of the Office of the Attorney-General (No. 1419-2004-MP-FN of 15 October 2004). (...) In such circumstances it is impossible to use the main refectory and restrictions have had to be placed on the use of public telephones so as to allow as many prisoners as possible to use the service.

The participants had all belonged to, utilized or interacted with a variety of grievance mechanisms, including operational-level (company and site-level) grievance mechanisms, domestic State-level dispute resolution mechanisms, National Contact Points established under the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, international-level grievance mechanisms linked to public financial institutions, or multi-stakeholder/multi-industry mechanisms. 4. (...) Participants identified the following incentives for business enterprises to establish or participate in non-judicial grievance mechanisms: (a) Threat of judicial action: the threat of judicial action and the desire to avoid costly and lengthy litigation would be a major incentive for companies to establish and participate in operational-level grievance mechanisms; (b) Risk of negative publicity: past experience shows that some companies will only engage with non-judicial grievance mechanisms in order to avoid possible negative publicity. Avoiding negative publicity could be an incentive for companies to establish operational-level grievance mechanisms; (c) Evidence that such mechanisms resolve problems: evidence of how operational-level grievance mechanisms work to reduce project delays and disruptions caused by conflicts with communities or workers and greater access to case studies and evidence would help to engage business enterprises in that process; 7 See India Infrastructure Report 2009: Land—A Critical Resource for Infrastructure, 3iNetwork and IDFC, p. 1.

(c) Para 5: Inadequate public information campaign resulting in many people not hearing about the Commission or being provided information on where, when and how to submit complaints: The Commission had, and continues to provide wide publicity on how a person or an organization can submit their complaints to the Commission. (...) The Secretary to the Commission also held comprehensive briefings with key personnel in the district and divisional administration in Northern and Eastern Provinces, including all District Secretaries, Divisional Secretaries and Grama Niladharis, on the procedures for submission of complaints and public hearings. It is testimony to the effectiveness of the publicity campaign conducted by the Commission that a considerable number of persons who had not submitted their complaints on time came before the public hearings in Jaffna and Kilinochchi districts to make representations. (...) However, the Commission will be providing each newly registered complainant a form in Tamil language to fill and return prior to being invited for public hearings. (n) Para 9: There should be a comprehensive publicity campaign in advance of scheduled hearings.

As a result, civil trials are often held in judges’ private offices instead of courtrooms, a practice which has a negative impact on the publicity of trials. E/CN.4/2006/52/Add.3 page 17 Security 65. (...) E/CN.4/2006/52/Add.3 page 18 Public and media access to judicial proceedings 71. (...) In practice however, the publicity of trials is not always guaranteed. This is partly due to the lack of courtrooms, and that many civil cases are therefore heard in the judge’s office.

Article 14(1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights acknowledges that a court has the power to exclude all or part of the public for reasons of morals, public order (ordre public) or national security in a democratic society, or when the interest of the private lives of the parties so requires, or to the extent strictly necessary in the opinion of the court in special circumstances where publicity would be prejudicial to the interests of justice. (...) The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, while reaffirming the right to a fair and public hearing, recognizes that the press and public may be excluded from all or part of a trial for reasons of morals, public order (ordre public) or national security in a democratic state, or when the interests of the private lives of the parties so require, or to the extent strictly necessary in the opinion of the court in special circumstances where publicity would prejudice the interests of justice. (...) The Conference of Presidents of European Supreme Courts meeting in Slovenia under the auspices of the Council of Europe formulated a statement on “The Supreme Court: Publicity, Visibility and Transparency”. That statement recognized “the necessity to satisfy the expectations of contemporary society with regard to justice” and stressed the importance of courts “demonstrating their openness and sensitivity”.