Search results

Le 14 juillet 1943 — qu'on veuille bien considérer la date! — lorsque j'exposais devant un auditoire dont on ne saurait nier les aptitudes scientifiques le sujet suivant: «Système et principaux problèmes d'une doctrine scientifique du tourisme», je me heurtais à l'absence de compréhension et d'intérêt d'une grande partie de l'assemblée, bénéficiais de l'estime mêlée de commisération d'un petit nombre d'auditeurs et ne trouvais l'adhésion que de quelques‐uns. Personne ne demanda la parole. Or, depuis 1941, il existait un Institut de recherches touristiques à l'Université de Berne et un Séminaire de tourisme à l'Ecole suisse des hautes études économiques et commerciales de Saint‐Gall; de plus, en 1942 avait paru l'ouvrage fait avec mon collègue Krapf sur les fondements d'une doctrine générale du tourisme. La publication, peu de temps après, de ma conférence quelque peu remaniée et développée, resta longtemps ignorée.

Nobody concerned with political economy can neglect the history of economic doctrines. Structural changes in the economy and society influence economic thinking and, conversely, innovative thought structures and attitudes have almost always forced economic institutions and modes of behaviour to adjust. We learn from the history of economic doctrines how a particular theory emerged and whether, and in which environment, it could take root. We can see how a school evolves out of a common methodological perception and similar techniques of analysis, and how it has to establish itself. The interaction between unresolved problems on the one hand, and the search for better solutions or explanations on the other, leads to a change in paradigma and to the formation of new lines of reasoning. As long as the real world is subject to progress and change scientific search for explanation must out of necessity continue.

This paper aims to determine whether tax evasion savings qualify as unlawful proceeds for money laundering purposes. Litigators, regulators and academics have debated the question for decades. A common argument is that tax evasion allows a bad actor to save money that the perpetrator already has on hand. It does not produce a new inflow of wealth that could properly be classified as proceeds. This paper addresses the validity of this argument by using a substance-based approach.

This paper applies the substance-over-form principle and two specialized judicial doctrines to the matter: the economic-substance and step-transaction doctrines.

This paper finds that in substance, tax evasion savings qualify as unlawful proceeds. The opposing argument may be valid on the surface, but it does not withstand the scrutiny of the substance-based principle and insights from the doctrines.

The finding of this paper implies that any courts which value substance can embrace tax evasion savings as unlawful proceeds. Government prosecutors can adopt the position with confidence that substance backs them up. National regulators can push the point. The United Nations’ Financial Action Task Force can consider the option to more explicitly recommend treating tax evasion savings as unlawful proceeds for money laundering.

Using a unique substance-based approach, this paper demonstrates that a dollar of tax evasion savings is substantively equivalent to a dollar of unlawful tax refund proceeds for money laundering purposes. Focusing on an unlawful tax refund overcomes many of the common concerns raised against the treatment of tax evasion savings as unlawful proceeds.

Post-Enlightenment liberalism faces a paradox: The liberal principle of legitimacy demands states justify their constitutional order in terms citizens can accept, but there is no uncontroversial comprehensive conception of justice on which to form the requisite consensus. Rawls resolves the paradox by embracing a pragmatism that abandons the concept of truth in the political forum to secure consensus and legitimacy. Philosophers have challenged the idea of justice without truth as incoherent, and social critics have attacked it as naïve. This chapter defends Rawls’s pragmatism against such critics and argues that the future of liberal constitutionalism may depend on its success.

The purpose of this paper is to explore how military strategic knowledge managers consider and respond to digitalization of operational processes in their revision of military knowledge management technologies. The research question is: which strategic considerations and professional concerns impact decisions about how far digitalization should be incorporated into Army planning doctrine?

The paper presents material from a qualitative research study which observed the process of revising Danish Army Field Manual III. The empirical data include 12 in-depth interviews as well as documents related to the revision process. Data were analysed using a thematic approach.

The paper identifies and discusses strategic dilemmas arising from incorporating digitalization into planning doctrine. Two major areas of concern are addressed. The first involves considerations about the extent of digitalization, including concerns about risk and issues of timing regarding choices of specific digital solutions. The second involves potential limits of digitalization in relation to military notions of the role and identity of the commander. The article suggests that digitalization may impact on professional roles and identities and that strategic knowledge management developers need to be cognizant of this.

The paper contributes to the literature in two ways. First, the paper draws attention to the notions of risk and timing in relation to strategic decisions on how far knowledge management technologies should make use of possibilities brought about by digitalization. Second, the paper provides insight into how digitalization may profoundly alter professional roles and identities.

The purpose of this paper is to assess the application of the nascent corporate opportunity doctrine in China by comparison with its well-established English counterpart; in particular, it evaluates whether the fine balance between business integrity and business efficiency has been struck.

It is argued that the scope of application of the corporate opportunity doctrine in China should be extended, and the rules on the burden of proof should be amended. Moreover, a stricter approach should be adopted by the Chinese judiciary for the purpose of protecting the company’s interests and enhancing business integrity.

This paper mainly focuses on the corporate opportunity doctrine. It does not discuss other duties of directors in detail.

It is useful for directors in balancing business integrity and business efficiency.

It is an original piece of work which assesses the corporate opportunity doctrine by making comparison with English law.

This chapter justifies India’s acquisition of nuclear weapons on the basis of an ancient Roman dictum: Si vis pacem, para bellum, which means, ‘if you want peace, prepare for war’. However, Indian leaders were far more imbued with idealism than realism. Nehru’s successors were not able to overcome Nehru’s idealistic commitment to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes alone.

However, the government led by the BJP changed Indian nuclear policy by conducting five nuclear tests in May 1998 and declaring India as a Nuclear Weapons State (NWS). India also came out with its nuclear doctrine.

This chapter discusses the basic principles of the Indian nuclear doctrine. Though there are several principles of the doctrine, only such principles which have a bearing on the ultimate goal of achieving nuclear disarmament are discussed in this chapter. India has pledged not to use nuclear weapons ‘against states which do not possess nuclear weapons, or are not aligned’ with other NWS. India adheres to the concept of no first use (NFU) of nuclear weapons. This is the heart of the nuclear doctrine. The principle of NFU says that the nation would resort to the use of nuclear weapons only as a weapon of self-defence and only in a second strike.

India as a reluctant NWS has also committed its nuclear doctrine to ‘global, verifiable and non-discriminatory nuclear disarmament’ as a national security objective. Indian nuclear doctrine is conducive in promoting nuclear disarmament. The chapter also proposes an international treaty around NFU as a first step towards nuclear disarmament.

Investigates the differences in protocols between arbitral tribunals and courts, with particular emphasis on US, Greek and English law. Gives examples of each country and its way of using the law in specific circumstances, and shows the variations therein. Sums up that arbitration is much the better way to gok as it avoids delays and expenses, plus the vexation/frustration of normal litigation. Concludes that the US and Greek constitutions and common law tradition in England appear to allow involved parties to choose their own judge, who can thus be an arbitrator. Discusses e‐commerce and speculates on this for the future.