[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [legalcitem] Prolegomena to the constitution of subcommittees
Dear Sara,
my comment in the text. Yours, Monica Il 16/02/2014 15:58, Sara S. Frug ha scritto:
Is the intent that, by analogy, executive branch / agency documents such as rulemaking dockets (including public comments), hearing transcripts, notices, reports, budgets, etc., be addressed by the "parliamentary documents" subcommittee? *** From my point of view any document involved in the "law-making process" enters in this category. Let me say that it is preferable to renaming this sub-committee as "law-making process documents". This because in some countries we don't have a parliament but an assembly or congress, secondly because we could include also regional/state/etc. law-making process documentation. Are alternative dispute resolution records or administrative adjudications intended to be treated by the court documents subcommittee?*** For me yes, this category includes also ODR, ADR, or administrative decisions. This category doesn't includes electronic court records. (If consolidation happens in these kinds of ways, it might be clearer (for an international audience) to name the subcommittees more descriptively.)*** I would like also to add in to the "legislation" category the "soft law", codification, etc. (e.g. FAO documentation). *** Finally I am proposing to add a new category of document: "administrative documents" that includes all legal documents coming from the public administration for delivering ordinary and extraordinary services. They are sometime relevant for the case-law and for sure they cite the law and the other legal sources. It is interesting to assign also to this category of document an URI/IRI.
|
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]