The phrase "arbitrary intervention" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used to describe an action taken without a specific reason or justification, often in a context where such actions are questioned or criticized.
Example: "The committee's decision to impose arbitrary intervention in the project raised concerns among the team members about the lack of transparency."
Alternatives: "random interference" or "unjustified involvement".
The Basic Law, however, prevents the arbitrary intervention of the central government.
Greater freedom of speech is not codified, and so remains subject to arbitrary intervention by the state.
It recognizes public and private ownership and guarantees the equality of all Egyptians before the law and their protection against arbitrary intervention by the state in the legal process.
The arbitrary intervention by the state neutralized the equal and institutionalized mechanism of negotiation and consultation between employees and employers inside enterprises.
Additionally, as stated in [12], the arbitrary intervention in a system which the models are unknown may lead the plant to an extreme physical behavior, which is not desired if a physically covert [12] attack is intended.
On Monday Labor's innovation and industry spokesman, Kim Carr, wrote to Tehan arguing that "arbitrary interventions of this kind contravene academic freedom, damaging the global standing of Australia's researchers and the institutions in which they work".
Investors may also fear that those who owned these firms before nationalisation will want their assets back; and wonder who, in the absence of an established pro-business political party, can protect them from future arbitrary interventions by the state.
"Arbitrary interventions in the carbon market would just make it more difficult for businesses to produce cost-effectively in the E.U.," Eurochambres, which represents millions of European businesses, said in a statement after the vote.
To be sure, there were a few critics such as the iconoclastic conservative editorial pages of the Wall Street Journal, whose staff worried about arbitrary interventions disrupting the flow of free markets.
Its report also complained that "imposing the label of 'terrorist' on countries advocating for sovereign equality, violating their sovereignty and inflicting immeasurable pain on the people by resorting to arbitrary armed intervention, sanctions, etc., should in no way be tolerated".
