CA A recordkeeping paradigm set up around the records continuum will take us into the future, because it sees opportunities, not problems, in e-environments. It fosters accountability through evidence-generating recordkeeping practices.
Phrases
<P1> This challenge is being addressed by what Chris Hurley has called second-generation archival law, which stretches the reach of archival jurisdictions into the domain of the record-creator. A good example of such archival law is South Africa's National Archives Act of 1996, which gives the National Archives regulatory authority over all public records from the moment of their creation. The Act provides a separate definition of "electronic records systems" and accords the National Archives specific powers in relation to their management. Also significant is that the Act brings within the National Archives' jurisdiction those categories of record-creators commonly allowed exclusion -- the security establishment, public services outside formal structures of government, and "privatized" public service agencies. (p.34) <P2> A characteristic (if an absence can be a characteristic) of most archival laws, first and second generation, is a failure to define either the conditions/processes requiring "recording" or the generic attributes of a "record." (p.34) <P3> Archival law, narrowly defined, is not at the cutting edge and is an increasingly small component of broader recordkeeping regimes. This is one of the many signs of an emerging post-custodial era, which Chris Hurley speculates will be informed by a third generation of archival law. Here, the boundaries between recordkeeping domains dissolve, with all of them being controlled by universal rules. (p.34)
Conclusions
RQ What is the relationship between the event and the record? Is the idea of evidence pivotal to the concept of "recordness"? Should evidence be privileged above all else in defining a record? What about remembering, forgetting, imagining?
