My definition of rule of law is a common one where:
1) Laws must be known by all who are governed by them (i.e. there cannot be secret laws)
2) The enforcement of laws must be foreseeable and predictable (i.e. laws should not be interpreted or enforced differently over time)
3) Laws should be enforced equally against all those subject to the law (i.e. there should be no exemptions)
I would argue that 'sharing economy' companies have been subjected to abrogations of 2 and 3 in many jurisdictions, and I fail to see how this specific enforcement action proves that any of these principles are being upheld. I appear to be in the minority, and a great number of people seem to believe that I am factually incorrect.
1) Laws must be known by all who are governed by them (i.e. there cannot be secret laws)
2) The enforcement of laws must be foreseeable and predictable (i.e. laws should not be interpreted or enforced differently over time)
3) Laws should be enforced equally against all those subject to the law (i.e. there should be no exemptions)
I would argue that 'sharing economy' companies have been subjected to abrogations of 2 and 3 in many jurisdictions, and I fail to see how this specific enforcement action proves that any of these principles are being upheld. I appear to be in the minority, and a great number of people seem to believe that I am factually incorrect.