Compare Papers

Paper 1

Onus and Quantum of Proof for Breaching the Standard of Procedure during the Movement Control Order

Mohamad Ismail Mohamad Yunus

Year

2021

Journal

Jurnal Undang-undang dan Masyarakat

DOI

10.17576/juum-2021-si-04

arXiv

-

The objective of this research paper is to highlight on the issues relating to the onus and quantum of proof for breaching the standard of procedure (SOP) during the movement control order (MCO) due to Pandemic Covid 19 in Malaysia. In tackling the issues, the research methodology applied by the author is by analysing and evaluating some decided cases, studying the substantive laws, regulations, and procedure in enforcing movement control order. The contemporary legal issues in this article are on whom the onus (burden) of proof lies and what is the quantum (standard) of proof required for the offence of breaching social distancing during the movement control order, be it conditional, restricted or recovery. The standard of procedure always changing based on the types of movement control order made by the Federal Government. In the New Straits Times dated 4 April 2021, it was reported that 17 publics were compounded for not practicing social distancing. Many questions raise as what is the real meaning of social distancing? In which type of offence, the social distancing offence lies on? What are the elements that will constitute the offence? As to the remedies, the author has submitted the nature of the offence for breaching the SOP during MCO. The expectation result of this paper is to give a clear picture as to the matter of standard of proof and burden of proof that to be considered by the trial court in deciding the issue of breaching SOP. The significance of this paper is to point out some contemporary identical legal issues relating to SOP during MCO. The issues will be highlighted in this article.

Open paper

Paper 2

On the system loophole of generalized noncontextuality

Victor Gitton, Mischa P. Woods

Year

2022

Journal

arXiv preprint

DOI

arXiv:2209.04469

arXiv

2209.04469

Generalized noncontextuality is a well-studied notion of classicality that is applicable to a single system, as opposed to Bell locality. It relies on representing operationally indistinguishable procedures identically in an ontological model. However, operational indistinguishability depends on the set of operations that one may use to distinguish two procedures: we refer to this set as the reference of indistinguishability. Thus, whether or not a given experiment is noncontextual depends on the choice of reference. The choices of references appearing in the literature are seldom discussed, but typically relate to a notion of system underlying the experiment. This shift in perspective then begs the question: how should one define the extent of the system underlying an experiment? Our paper primarily aims at exposing this question rather than providing a definitive answer to it. We start by formulating a notion of relative noncontextuality for prepare-and-measure scenarios, which is simply noncontextuality with respect to an explicit reference of indistinguishability. We investigate how verdicts of relative noncontextuality depend on this choice of reference, and in the process introduce the concept of the noncontextuality graph of a prepare-and-measure scenario. We then discuss several proposals that one may appeal to in order to fix the reference to a specific choice, and relate these proposals to different conceptions of what a system really is. With this discussion, we advocate that whether or not an experiment is noncontextual is not as absolute as often perceived.

Open paper