英国、加拿大和澳大利亚的反恐法律和政策:比较视角

Q2 Social Sciences Journal of Strategic Security Pub Date : 2023-07-01 DOI:10.5038/1944-0472.16.2.2072
N. Morag
{"title":"英国、加拿大和澳大利亚的反恐法律和政策:比较视角","authors":"N. Morag","doi":"10.5038/1944-0472.16.2.2072","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article looks at the similarities and differences in British, Canadian, and Australian counterterrorism laws and policies. Canada and Australia are contrasted with the United Kingdom because their respective approaches to counterterrorism are based on the British approach, and yet have evolved to take into account differences in the nature and scope of the threat and the differing styles of governance in place in Canada and Australia. The article looks at each country in the context of: counterterrorism laws; detention and disruption practices; investigatory approaches; intelligence and law enforcement institutions; and the treatment of foreign fighters. The article then draws some conclusions regarding the evolution and divergence of counterterrorism law and policy in these countries and posits a question for future research.","PeriodicalId":37950,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Strategic Security","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Counterterrorism Law and Policy in the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia: A Comparative Perspective\",\"authors\":\"N. Morag\",\"doi\":\"10.5038/1944-0472.16.2.2072\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article looks at the similarities and differences in British, Canadian, and Australian counterterrorism laws and policies. Canada and Australia are contrasted with the United Kingdom because their respective approaches to counterterrorism are based on the British approach, and yet have evolved to take into account differences in the nature and scope of the threat and the differing styles of governance in place in Canada and Australia. The article looks at each country in the context of: counterterrorism laws; detention and disruption practices; investigatory approaches; intelligence and law enforcement institutions; and the treatment of foreign fighters. The article then draws some conclusions regarding the evolution and divergence of counterterrorism law and policy in these countries and posits a question for future research.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37950,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Strategic Security\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Strategic Security\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5038/1944-0472.16.2.2072\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Strategic Security","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5038/1944-0472.16.2.2072","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文探讨了英国、加拿大和澳大利亚反恐法律和政策的异同。加拿大和澳大利亚与英国形成对比,因为它们各自的反恐方法都是基于英国的方法,但在发展过程中考虑到了威胁的性质和范围的差异以及加拿大和澳大利亚不同的治理风格。这篇文章从以下方面审视每个国家:反恐法律;拘留和扰乱治安的做法;调查方法;情报和执法机构;以及外国战士的待遇。然后,文章就这些国家反恐法律和政策的演变和分歧得出了一些结论,并为未来的研究提出了一个问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Counterterrorism Law and Policy in the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia: A Comparative Perspective
This article looks at the similarities and differences in British, Canadian, and Australian counterterrorism laws and policies. Canada and Australia are contrasted with the United Kingdom because their respective approaches to counterterrorism are based on the British approach, and yet have evolved to take into account differences in the nature and scope of the threat and the differing styles of governance in place in Canada and Australia. The article looks at each country in the context of: counterterrorism laws; detention and disruption practices; investigatory approaches; intelligence and law enforcement institutions; and the treatment of foreign fighters. The article then draws some conclusions regarding the evolution and divergence of counterterrorism law and policy in these countries and posits a question for future research.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Strategic Security
Journal of Strategic Security Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
26
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Strategic Security (JSS) is a double-blind peer-reviewed professional journal published quarterly by Henley-Putnam School of Strategic Security with support from the University of South Florida Libraries. The Journal provides a multi-disciplinary forum for scholarship and discussion of strategic security issues drawing from the fields of global security, international relations, intelligence, terrorism and counterterrorism studies, among others. JSS is indexed in SCOPUS, the Directory of Open Access Journals, and several EBSCOhost and ProQuest databases.
期刊最新文献
Engagement with Radical Propaganda drives Cognitive Radicalization: An Analysis of a Right-Wing Online Ecosystem A Country of Defiance: Mapping the Casamance in Senegal. By Mark W. Deets. Athens: Ohio University Press, 2023 Bukele’s Formula for Terrorism “Divergent Perspectives: A Comparative Review of ‘The Nuclear Club’ and ‘Winning and Losing the Nuclear Peace’” Hybrid Warfare: How to Escape the Conceptual Gray-Zone
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1