Search results

The purpose of this paper is to provide an empirical analysis on aid-related misconduct and sectoral regulatory failures. Via a series of Oxfam revelations, this paper aims to highlight potential civil and administrative remedies to rectify wrongdoings and increase accountability in aid organizations.

Chronicling recent revelations of misconduct by aid workers, this paper begins with an overview of moral and legal responsibilities of the entrusted; then it illustrates how the Oxfam misconduct violates those moral and legal responsibilities in aid delivery. The author draws upon legal and administrative dilemmas on regulating the aid sector and aid workers’ behavior. Finally, this paper offers practical civil remedies for the harmed and administrative remedies for long-term institutional reforms.

The damage – across a broad spectrum of interests, caused by aid workers engaging in exploitative conduct – not only is a betrayal of the trust reposed by vulnerable people in these individuals but also a failure with far-reaching implications on the part of the donor organizations. The use of the criminal law in aid-related misconduct is highly problematic, assuming a specific offense is committed (which, in many cases, it may not have). There are jurisdictional limitations on the ability of donor countries and international regulations other than in regard to peacekeepers are almost nonexistent. Given such context, civil and administrative remedies provide a viable alternative for the harmed who seek justice.

Legal remedies can be highly jurisdictional contingent. Depending on the specific jurisdiction where misconduct takes place, there are potentially other suited remedies not mentioned in this paper to address aid workers’ unethical behavior.

This paper provides tips on using existing legal channel (the civil law) and available pro bono resources to hold transgressors and their employers accountable.

Effective regulating aid-related conduct prevents further harm on vulnerable people and restores public trust in the aid sector.

This paper addresses the regulatory blind spot on aid workers’ exploitative conduct through the context of Oxfam revelations. Second, it provides practical policy recommendations for navigating legal and administrative dilemmas on regulating aid workers’ behavior.

In a high‐profile case that first drew big media headlines last February, a New York brokerage firm and a ring of eight brokers on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange were charged with perpetrating a scheme in which they made over $11.1m in illegal profits and at the same time covered their tracks with an elaborate fraud.

The aim of this paper is to determine the available remedies for medical negligence instances in Bangladesh.

This research work is qualitative in nature. Books, journal articles, case law and statutory laws have been reviewed to formulate this work.

A victim of medical negligence in Bangladesh can approach the court seeking remedy under the Criminal Law, Civil Law and Constitutional Law. Moreover, medical professionals are expected to be aware about the legal consequences of their medically negligent practices, and they should indulge in ethical practices so as to avoid getting embroiled in controversial situations and litigations.

The main reasons for unaccountability of medical practitioners include the unwillingness of people to initiate action against medical practitioners and the lack of legal knowledge about the remedies for medical negligence instances. This paper will assist in gather the required legal knowledge.

The high crimes of bribery and money laundering resonate vividly with the public, especially where politically exposed persons (PEPs) are involved. Conventional wisdom thus far, dictates the adoption of even stiffer criminal sanctions for perpetrators of such crimes to solidify deterrence. This paper contends that while this approach may be a viable option in respect of PEPs in Western jurisdictions, it is less so with PEPs in Africa, where their peculiar socio-legal antecedents have rendered the venomous arrow of criminal sanction a largely anodyne prickle. The paper further contends that only a paradigm shift away from criminal to tougher civil remedy options can effectively address the endemic incidents of a growing number of PEPs actively engaged in financial crime aimed at asset stripping the state for personal gain in Africa.

The paper juxtaposes empirical evidence from historical records with comparative regional and international approaches to establish some creative new thinking on the subject matter.

The paper makes an important, significant and persuasive argument for a kind of paradigm shift in the approach to fighting corruption by PEPs in Africa specifically …. It is quite creative in deciphering a major root cause of the ineffectiveness in most of Africa of criminal sanction as an anti-corruption weapon, and in pressing trust law and the principles of fiduciary obligation into the service of thinking through the reinvigoration of the legal battle against corruption in Africa.

The paper makes a significant original contribution to the legal and policy literature. The author also displays an impressively sound technical command of the relevant and rather pivotal trust law principles and case law.

The purpose of this paper is to identify a number of civil considerations which may accompany electronic crime. Economic crime committed through electronic means may give rise to potential civil claims, both by any company caught up in the crime and against that company, usually seeking compensation for the loss and damage resulting from the crime, particularly in circumstances where it can be difficult to identify and locate the perpetrator of the electronic crime.

This paper analyzes trading and tipping activities in insider trading litigation decided by federal courts from January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2014.

Legal documents from the US Securities and Exchange Commission, LexisNexis and Westlaw databases were coded to determine profile, patterns of trading and settlement outcomes.

Results of statistical analysis indicate that a defendant in both civil and criminal cases is more likely to trade on the information when he/she receives a direct, financial benefit from breaching his/her duty of confidentiality. The defendant tipper is also more likely to pass on the information to a close personal friend, business associate or family member. The average amount of profit of defendants in both civil and criminal proceedings substantially exceeds the average amount of their settlements.

This paper offers support for the rational choice model – insider trading is often based on rational calculations of benefits not only to the defendant but also to his/her family and associates. Although the threat of civil enforcement and criminal proceedings may possibly deter him/her from committing the crime, results indicate that the amounts of settlement in both proceedings are considerably lower than the amount of profits obtained from the offense.

The exclusionary rule remains one of the most controversial doctrines in America’s constitutionalized criminal procedure. Jurists and commentators criticize the American exclusionary rule as a rule unique to American jurisprudence. Though American jurists and commentators’ criticism focuses on the Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule, the criticism of the American exclusionary rule with reference to practices in foreign countries serves to create and maintain the misconception that the United States is the only country that has the exclusionary rule. The belief that the exclusionary rule exists only in the United States is far from accurate. This article examines the historical development and the current status of exclusionary rules in the United States, England, France, Germany, and Italy. Attentions are especially devoted to analyzing the characteristics of the American exclusionary rule with reference to exclusionary rules in other countries.

The Criminal liability of trade unions and their members.

Changing environments demand that police improve their effectiveness in reducing crime, while maintaining community confidence, support and legitimacy. How can police agencies encourage third parties to take responsibility for crime problems while avoiding inequitable outcomes?

The evidence for effective policing for crime reduction is examined, with a focus on third party policing. Potential adverse outcomes are discussed, and a normative framework is proposed.

Third party policing that is both effective and legitimacy enhancing is possible, if four key principles are observed. These are conducting a broad planning approach that includes consideration of the detriments as well as the benefits of strategies especially to vulnerable community members, clearly identified goals and the use of the least coercive means possible, clearly articulated policies and protocols, and institutional and individual accountability for strategy implementation and outcomes.

There is emerging evidence about the effectiveness of regulatory approaches to crime reduction, such as third party policing, but little attention has been paid to its potential for inequitable outcomes and impact on police legitimacy.

This article examines the implementation of the Insider Dealing Directive, the aim of which is European harmonisation in the UK and in Germany, two European countries with completely different backgrounds on this issue.