Pharmacy legislation:public protector or professional hindrance?

Pharmacy originates from a background of medication compounding and supply. More recently, this role has developed away from an absolute focus on the supply of pharmaceuticals with, for example, the advent of pharmacist prescribing. Nevertheless, for a majority of the profession, medication supply remains a core activity. Regulation of the pharmacy profession is now the responsibility of the General Pharmaceutical Council, although up until 27 September 2010, this role fell to the Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain (RPSGB). Before this change, in one of the most high-profile legal cases involving a pharmacist in a professional capacity, R. v Lee, a pharmacist was prosecuted firstly for gross negligence manslaughter, later revised to offences under the Medicines Act 1968, for a single error relating to medication supply, and was given a suspended custodial sentence. Offences against sections 64 or 85 of the Medicines Act are absolute offences and there is no due diligence defence. Prosecution of a pharmacist for the supply of incorrect medication may seem a measured course of action to protect the public from the wrongful supply of potent pharmacotherapeutic agents; however, further analysis of Lee indicates that this approach may be counterproductive. An appeal of the original conviction in the Lee case has resulted in a clarification of the interpretation of section 85(5); however currently, prosecutions under section 64 are still a possibility. Owing to the seriousness of a criminal conviction under section 64, this continuation will potentially stifle the profession's ability to learn from dispensing errors. © The Author [2013]. Published by Oxford University Press; all rights reserved.

Organized crime legislation in the European Union. Harmonization and approximation of criminal law, national legislations and the EU framework decision on the fight against organised crime, by Francesco Calderoni

Book review: Heidelberg, Dordrecht, London, and New York, Springer, 2010, 189 pp., £93.55 (hardcover), ISBN 978-3-642-04330-7, e-ISBN 978-3-642-04331-4

Let's stick together? Explaining boundaries to territorial policy variation:the case of Germany's prisons legislation

This article offers an initial impact assessment regarding the introduction of new legislative responsibilities at the Land level in a case study of prisons policy (Strafvollzug). Combining an analysis of new legislation produced across the 16 Länder since the responsibility for prisons policy was transferred to the Land level, and insights into the mechanics of policy development obtained through a series of interviews with senior politicians and officials, this article finds that the desire among Länder to legislative independently has varied, with substantial backing for co-ordination in the development of new legislation. This has helped to confound expectations of a ‘competition of harshness’ which many expected to result from decentralisation. However, even before the 2006 reforms, there were substantial variations between the Länder when it came to implementing prisons policy, so consideration of the sub-national level in this area remains essential.

Unorthodoxy in legislation: The Hungarian experience

This paper deals with legal unorthodoxy. The main idea is to study the so-called unorthodox taxes Hungary has adopted in recent years. The study of unorthodox taxes will be preceded by a more general discussion of how law is made under unorthodoxy, and what are the special features of unorthodox legal policy. Unorthodoxy challenges equality before the law and is critical towards mass democracies. It also raises doubts on the operability of the rule of law, relying on personal skills, or loyalty, rather than on impersonal mechanisms arising from checks and balances as developed by the division of political power. Besides, for lack of legal suppositions, legislation suffers from casuistry and regulatory capture.

Unorthodoxy in legislation: The Hungarian experience

This paper deals with legal unorthodoxy. The main idea is to study the so-called unorthodox taxes Hungary has adopted in recent years. The study of unorthodox taxes will be preceded by a more general discussion of how law is made under unorthodoxy, and what are the special features of unorthodox legal policy. Unorthodoxy challenges equality before the law and is critical towards mass democracies. It also raises doubts on the operability of the rule of law, relying on personal skills, or loyalty, rather than on impersonal mechanisms arising from checks and balances as developed by the division of political power. Besides, for lack of legal suppositions, legislation suffers from casuistry and regulatory capture.

Central Park Be-In on Easter Sunday

Inscriptions: Verso: [stamped] Photograph by Freda Leinwand. [463 West Street, Studio 229G, New York, NY 10014].

Central Park Be-In on Easter Sunday

Inscriptions: Verso: [stamped] Credit must be given to Leinwand from Monkmeyer Press Photo Service].

Central Park Be-In on Easter Sunday

Inscriptions: Verso: [stamped] Credit must be given to Leinwand from Monkmeyer Press Photo Service].

Central Park Be-In on Easter Sunday

Inscriptions: Verso: [stamped] Credit must be given to Freda Leinwand from Monkmeyer Press Photo Service…

Nanotechnology in food industry II: risk assessment and legislation

Currently, there is increasing use of nanomaterials in the food industry thanks to the many advantages offered and make the products that contain them more competitive in the market. Their physicochemical properties often differ from those of bulk materials, which require specialized risk assessment. This should cover the risks to the health of workers and consumers as well as possible environmental risks. The risk assessment methods must go updating due to more widespread use of nanomaterials, especially now that are making their way down to consumer products. Today there is no specific legislation for nanomaterials, but there are several european dispositions and regulations that include them. This review gives an overview of the risk assessment and the existing current legislation regarding the use of nanotechnology in the food industry.

Governance, Governments and Legislation

The mandate for policy action on ocean acidification falls under the remit of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate change (UNFCCC) since, like climate change, ocean acidification is a result of anthropogenic CO2 emissions. The international community dealing with climate change must play a decisive role in encouraging national and local governments to scale-up efforts to mitigate CO2 emissions thereby reducing the impact of both climate change and ocean acidification. The annual UNFCCC meeting, Conference of the Parties (COP) represent pivotal opportunities for the ocean science community to provide the international community dealing with climate change with information and recommendations leading to informed solutions and policy guidelines that address ocean acidification. The objective is to develop a comprehensive message about the relevance of ocean acidification in current and future governance agendas. The target audiences include the international community dealing with climate change, climate negotiators, national leaders, UN agencies and Non-governmental Organisations, as well as the parties involved in the UNFCCC process.