Abstract
This column discusses whether desktop legal research must be reviewed by a human research ethics committee (HREC). We have been made aware that some HRECs have interpreted the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research as compelling legal researchers to seek ethics review for desktop legal research. We argue that this literal interpretation of the National Statement erroneously treats desktop legal research as “human research”. Including desktop legal research in the definition of “human research” damages the public interest. We call on the Council of Australian Law Deans and the authors of the National Statement to make it clear that HREC review is not required for desktop legal research.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 36-48 |
| Number of pages | 13 |
| Journal | Journal of Law and Medicine |
| Volume | 32 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| Publication status | Published - 1 Jun 2025 |
Keywords
- legal research
- human ethics review
- National Statement