Virtues and Perils of Anonymity: Should Intermediaries Bear the Burden?

On October 10, 2013, the Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) handed down a judgment (Delfi v. Estonia) condoning Estonia for a law which, as interpreted, held a news portal liable for the defamatory comments of its users. Amongst the considerations that led the Court to find no violation of freedom of expression in this particular case were, above all, the inadequacy of the automatic screening system adopted by the website and the users’ option to post their comments anonymously (i.e. without need for prior registration via email), which in the Court’s view rendered the protection conferred to the injured party via direct legal action against the authors of the comments ineffective. Drawing on the implications of this (not yet final) ruling, this paper discusses a few questions that the tension between the risk of wrongful use of information and the right to anonymity generates for the development of Internet communication, and examines the role that intermediary liability legislation can play to manage this tension.

Collaborating or Colluding: A Practice Research Project with Ex-Offenders and their Families in Singapore

Working with the family members of ex-offenders is a daunting and newly developing aspect of offender rehabilitation in Singapore. A small scale practice research project was carried out by three social work practitioners and two academics over a period of 22 months, with the aim to explore the pertinent issues and challenges in working with family members of ex-offenders. Systematic documentation of the process of working with three cases was carried out. Specific skills and strategies were suggested, and recommendations for changes to service delivery and policy for working with ex-offenders and family members were made to the authorities. This article highlights the enriching journey of collaboration between the academics and practitioners.