https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/48651 2026-04-05T11:23:57Z 2026-04-05T11:23:57Z https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/135064 2025-06-18T08:00:43Z 2022-01-01T00:00:00Z

Title: The jurisdictional game in regulating law enforcement access to data across borders Abstract: This work and its abstract are both under embargo until the restriction is lifted. Description: Ph.D.(Melit.)

2022-01-01T00:00:00Z https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/135055 2025-06-18T07:41:25Z 2024-01-01T00:00:00Z

Title: Gaps and UNintended consequences : an analysis of global governance discourse on AI use in counter-terrorism, intelligence, and security Abstract: This work and its abstract are both under embargo until the restriction is lifted. Description: Ph.D.(Melit.)

2024-01-01T00:00:00Z https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/86545 2022-01-07T14:51:13Z 2021-01-01T00:00:00Z

Title: Open government in Ghana : its implementation, challenges and the way forward Abstract: The idea of ‘open’ is increasingly gaining grounds in modern day political and academic discussions, being envisioned as a new mode of being, gaining considerable significance, and seen as relevant to many spheres of life. Open Society (société ouverte) as a term was coined by Henri Bergson, a French philosopher in his book, The Two Sources of Morality and Religion in 1932 in which he contrasted an open society with what he referred to as closed society, which he defined as a closed system of law, morality, or religion. According to Bergson, one source is tribal, which results in a closed society in which members have a strong bond with one another and distrust or animosity toward other tribes. The other source, on the other hand, is universal and contributes to an open society that is governed by universal human rights and aims to protect and promote personal freedom. The concept of open society was further expanded by the Austrian-born British philosopher Karl Popper who is now often associated with the idea as he gave popularity to it. In his 1945 book, The Open Society and its Enemies, Popper develops a theoretical framework centred on a dichotomy between the open society and the closed society. He asserts that openness offers the greatest opportunities for knowledge generation and subsequently, better decision making. He further justifies the importance of openness by arguing that no one can solely decide for sure what the best path for society is, from the outset. Popper noted that abstract, fundamental philosophies such as communism and fascism, which claim to hold the absolute truth, can threaten open societies. Popper being a philosopher of science believed that the ultimate truth is beyond the comprehension of the human intellect. He therefore argues that ideologies like communism and fascism which seek to eliminate uncertainty are critically flawed. According to him, they are guaranteed to be inaccurate and misleading precisely because they claim to be in control of the ultimate truth and that only by different means of repression will these philosophies be enforced on society. He noted that an open society, however, acknowledges the uncertainties that come with our incomplete understanding and aims to create laws and institutions that permit persons with opposing opinions and interests to coexist peacefully. These laws and institutions are uniquely characterized by the fact that they uphold individual freedom. Description: M.A.(Melit.)

2021-01-01T00:00:00Z https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/50202 2020-07-22T10:36:09Z 2019-01-01T00:00:00Z

Title: Towards a coherent information policy in intelligence oversight : a comparative approach to emerging trends Abstract: Individuals are growing more and more concerned about how their data is being handled, both by private parties and public institutions. If the ways in which companies obtain and use people’s data are more or less accessible and the individual is able to oversee them himself by reading the privacy and personal data policy and choosing whether to use or not a certain service, when it comes to governments’ access and handling of data, the individual cannot “opt out” from the system, unless he moves into the wilderness and gives up any technological device which collects data. Given this is not a feasible option for most individuals, it means that people must take other measures to protect their privacy, in the context of a highly technologically-reliant society. One of these measures is acquiring a good understanding of how their personal data is being used by government agencies (and private companies), which are the safeguards put in place, both at national and international level, and how to act when he feels that his privacy has been violated. The data subject should therefore understand the functioning of and trust its domestic oversight system (hence the paramountcy of an effective mechanism) and know which are the steps he can take in order to remedy any violations of his fundamental human rights, such as the right to privacy. Speaking about the link between privacy and technology, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Privacy shared his belief that, “a number of new technologies, especially the Internet, smartphones, big data analytics, wearables, smart energy, smart cities etc. render individuals and communities more vulnerable to surveillance by the states within which they live as well as by the intelligence agencies of hostile states. This is one of the most significant risks to privacy and other human rights such as freedom of expression, freedom of association and freedom of religion that we have witnessed for decades. The individual and, especially, the cumulative effect of these technologies is to give the state the ability to closely profile and monitor the behaviour of its citizens in ways and to an extent hitherto unprecedented. The net result is that these technologies may be used to undermine social values such as democracy as well as individual freedoms. Democracy may be an imperfect mechanism but it is historically the one which has provided the best eco-system possible within which human rights are nurtured.” Hence a test regarding the legality, proportionality and necessity of any measure which could interfere with individuals’ rights and freedoms is mandatory in any democratic society. In the case where one's own Government is carrying out surveillance, one must depend on safeguards provided by domestic law and European-wide safeguards, including Convention 108, the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and the European Court of Human Rights for all Council of Europe Member States, as well as the Police Directive for EU Member States. When a foreign Government is the one carrying out the surveillance, then an individual’s safeguards are limited to a) what the domestic law of that foreign government (which is carrying out the surveillance operation) provides as safeguards, regardless of the individual’s physical location, and b) what international law provides as safeguards (if any). Description: M.A.INFO.POLICY&GOVERNANCE

2019-01-01T00:00:00Z