Engineering ethics Engineering ethics - Ingenia

PROFESSIONAL ISSUES
ingenia
52
3 An international conference on
‘Research in Ethics and Engineering’
was held in Delft in April 2002 with
papers presented from universities
in Sweden, Holland, Germany,
Israel, UK and USA.
4 For a general review and list of
further authorities see Ronald R
Klein, ‘Ethical Issues in
Engineering: Beyond Disaster
Ethics’ (2000) at
http://www3.itu.edu.tr/~sosbil/Scie
ncesemnars2.html. Several US
websites contain extensive
bibliographies as well, including
those of the National Society of
Professional Engineers (NSPE) at
http://www.nspe.org/ethics/eh5-
rel.asp and the Online Ethics
Center for Engineering and Science
at http://onlineethics.org/.
5 Both questions are addressed in
the paper ‘Engineering Ethics: Do
Engineers owe duties to the
public?’, delivered as the Lloyd’s
Register lecture to The Royal
Academy of Engineering, 22 April
2002. This article is based on part
of the lecture.
6 These include the public enquiries
into the railway accidents at
Clapham Junction (1988), Southall
(1997) and Ladbroke Grove (1999).
7 The institutional rules quoted above
are those current at the date of this
article. In most cases no significant
amendments have been made
since The Academy draft.
8 The document itself ends with a
complete disclaimer on behalf of
the Fellowship.
9 FREng, subsequently President of
ICE.
10 The Standing Committee was
established jointly between the
Institutions of Civil and Structural
Engineers (and Municipal Engineers
before their merger) following the
partial collapse at Ronan Point,
Newham, in 1968.
11 Whistleblower protection on the
federal level in the US is scattered
throughout various statutes,
including the environmental laws
(such as Superfund, 42 U.S.C.
9610, the Water Pollution Control
Act, 33 U.S.C. 1367, and the
Atomic Energy and Energy
Reorganization Acts, 42 U.S.C.
5851), the employment laws (such
as the Occupational Safety and
Health Act, 29 U.S.C. 660(c), the
Federal Mine Health and Safety Act,
30 U.S.C. 30 U.S.C. 815 (c) (1977)
and the National Labor Relations
Act, 29 U.S.C. 158(a)(4)), and in a
number of other subject areas.
12 For example, see Rachel Davis,
‘For Whistleblowers, Ethical Mile is
a Hard Walk’ (March 2001) at the
NSPE website at
http://nspe.org/etweb/13-
01feature.asp and Walter Elden,
‘Curtailing Ethical Harassment’
(February 1996) at the IEEE
website at
http://caffeine.ieee.org/INST/feb96/
ethics.html.
13 By insertion of a new Part IV A of
the Employment Rights Act 1996.
14 Tait P ‘Confidential Reporting in the
UK Commercial Air Transport
Industry’, HSE Seminar, 1998.
15 Beedel R ‘International Marine
Accident Reporting Scheme:
Lessons from MARS’ Conference’,
London, October 1999.
16 Published in Counsel, February
2002 with an explanatory article by
the Attorney General.
17 Under English Law, there is no
settled rule as to whether amicus
curiae can place evidence before the
Court. See Gaskill v Gaskill [1921]
p425 and Keys v Keys [1921] p204
but see also Re: H per Booth.
However, the Court’s very request
for factual information indicates that
the amicus filing will be considered
as evidence by the Court.
18 In the recent and widely publicised
Pinochet case, the Divisional Court
and the House of Lords permitted
Amnesty International to intervene
as an interested party – an
intervener, as well as appointing an
amicus curiae to assist the Court R
v Bow Street Magistrates ex. parte
Pinochet Ugarte [1998] 4 AER 897.
19 Walter Elden, ‘Curtailing Ethical
Harassment’, on the IEEE website at
http://caffeine.ieee.org/INST/feb96/e
thics.html.
20 Walter Elden, ‘IEEE’s Member
Conduct Committee – 20 Years of
Operation’ at
http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/INST
/feb98/conduct.html.
21 IEEE Policy and Procedures
Manual 7.13 ‘Preparation and Filing
of Amicus Curiae Briefs’ at
http://www.ieee.org/about/whatis/p
olicies/p7-13.html.
22 SUP.CT.R.37 and FED. R.APP.
p29. Many of the State Courts in
the United States also have rules
permitting the submission of
amicus requests. However, the
rules vary and in some cases are
much more restrictive than Federal
Court practice. For a sampling of
State Court practice, see Nancy
Bage Sorenson, ‘The Ethical
Implications of Amicus Briefs’
(1999) 30 St. Mary’s LJ 1219.
23 Joseph Kearney, ‘The Influence of
amicus curiae Briefs on the
Supreme Court’ (2000) 148 U.PA.
L. REV. 743, 752–753.
John Uff worked in civil and
geotechnical engineering, retraining
to specialise in construction and
engineering law. He has been
involved in many international
disputes, covering many parts of
the world, most recently in
Australia. In 1987 he became the
founding
Director of the
Centre of
Construction
Law at Kings
College,
London, where
he has held the
Nash Chair of Engineering Law
since 1992. The Centre teaches a
Masters course to engineers and
lawyers. Since 1996 he has chaired
a number of Public Inquiries into
the water industry and railways.