Public responsibility and private action

Citation

Xing, L.-H. (2014), "Public responsibility and private action", Journal of Financial Crime, Vol. 21 No. 1. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFC-11-2013-0061

Public responsibility and private action

Article Type:

Editorial

From:

Journal of Financial Crime, Volume 21, Issue 1

The Thirty-First International Symposium on Economic Crime took place as usual at Jesus College, within the University of Cambridge during the first week of September. The over-arching theme was the relationship between public and private institutions in the prevention and control of economic crime. As in previous years the primary theme was supplemented by a considerable number of other topics related to the control of economically motivated crime and abuse. The symposium attracted well over 1,400 participants from 94 countries. These included senior ministers and officials, diplomats, personnel from law enforcement, supervisory and regulatory agencies, intelligence and security organisations, judges, prosecutors and a considerable number of people from the private sector. In addition to those who are concerned professionally and commercially with prevention and control of fraud, there were many delegates from compliance and risk management.

The Cambridge Symposium is primarily organised by the Centre for International Documentation on Organised and Economic Crime supported by a number of other organising institutions including the University of Cambridge and numerous other leading academic and research institutions around the world. It is also supported by a large number of governments and their agencies. Indeed, this year the principal sponsors were the City of London Police and the Serious Fraud Office for England, Wales and Northern Ireland. The symposium is organised on a non-profit-making basis and is very different in its ethos, character and organisation from the many other conferences and seminars that are held on various aspects of financial crime. It was established by Professor Barry Rider in 1981 with the primary objective of promoting meaningful co-operation and collaboration in preventing and controlling economically motivated crime and abuse. Over the years it has attracted well over 20,000 participants concerned about these issues through the portals of Jesus College. While it is supported by many governments it prides itself that it is independent from government, or indeed, any other organisation. Consequently, it has been able to provide a forum for discussion and the development of mutual understanding for governments and agencies that would not normally share the same platform. It has also enabled representatives from agencies who officially would not be able to collaborate to work together for the benefit of their respective constituencies. Thus, there have been cases where important issues have been resolved between for example, agencies of the People’s Republic of China and Taiwan. Indeed, both China and Taiwan play a significant role in promoting the annual symposium.

The level of expertise and range of disciplines is unique. This year there were over 400 expert presenters ranging from chief justices to undercover cops. The organisers of the symposium seek to encourage candour and openness in the deliberations that take place at Jesus College. Consequently, the press are there not as reporters but on the basis that as individuals, journalists have an important role to play in the fight against fraud and abuse. The only record of the proceedings is the papers that speakers are invited to submit for publication in this journal and the Journal of Money Laundering Control. In this regard the symposium furthers the practical objectives of those who initially found it; the promotion of mutual assistance in fighting economically motivated and relevant crime. Indeed, while this year saw a significant increase in the number of academic participants these were primarily individuals involved directly with research often associated with governmental agencies. Various editorial comments of this journal have often bemoaned the fact that in Britain and in very many other countries the level of interest exhibited by academics in traditional law and business schools to the issues addressed by the annual symposia is almost negligible.

Given the range of issues that were addressed in the plenary and parallel plenary sessions together with over 60 specialised workshops and numerous keynote addresses it would be misleading to pick out specific issues that surfaced as concerns during this exceptionally and uniquely rich programme. However, it is perhaps worth pointing out that while there was universal agreement that the private sector would increasingly required to participate with government in the management of risk associated with crime and its management, there was considerable debate as to how far it is acceptable, practical and efficacious to pursue this strategy. Now that so much emphasis is placed on non-traditional interdiction and control of crime and terror, particularly through the tactics of disruption, there are real issues in the shift of legal risk to those who engage in the business of minding other people’s wealth. Perhaps, one of the most important and unresolved areas relates to the control and management of information, a topic which Professor Rider indicated would be high on the agenda of the Thirty-Second International Symposium on Economic Crime.

September 2013

Li-Hong Xing