Search results

The purpose of this paper is to identify and discuss impediments in the compilation of an application for a search and seizure warrant for digital evidence and the structure of such a warrant in South African criminal cases.

This paper provides a brief overview of international and local impediments, followed by a detailed discussion of the implications of these impediments and how it is approached in various jurisdictions. The methodology of this paper consists of a literature review.

Addressing the impediments in the compilation of the application and the warrant will be beneficial for forensic investigators, the South African Police Service (SAPS) and the administration of justice in South Africa.

Search and seizures for digital evidence form part of civil, regulatory and criminal search and seizures. This study focuses on the search and seizure of digital evidence in criminal matters pursuant to mainly the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 and the Cybercrimes Act 19 of 2020.

The originality of this paper lies in the approach to the drafting of applications for search and seizure warrants for digital information in South Africa. The contribution of the study is that, by using this approach, the SAPS can address the impediments during the application and compilation of the warrants, which would enhance the quality of investigations and contribute to the successful investigation and prosecution of crime in South Africa.

The purpose of this paper is to explore and evaluate the current legal position on the admissibility and exclusion of illegally obtained evidence in money laundering cases.

A thorough exploratory analytical analysis signifies that such illegally obtained evidence from money laundering offences is admissible, provided it does not undermine the administration of justice or the right to a fair trial.

By virtue of the lack of written or codified rules governing the admissibility and exclusion of illegally obtained evidence in cases involving money laundering, the rule of admissibility remains the primary foundational principle for the governance of the admissibility and exclusion of illegally obtained evidence in money laundering cases.

The Malaysian Criminal Justice System has historically relied on the long-standing admissibility principles to admit and exclude illegally obtained evidence. For decades, courts have used their discretion to admit illegally obtained evidence based on the relevancy test, and they have further demonstrated to use the same discretion to exclude gravely prejudicial evidence. Evidence obtained illegally but if relevant to the matter in issue is deemed admissible. Evidence derived from an act associated with unlawful activities or a predicate offence in money laundering may be obtained illegally, which may influence the prosecution case and conversely, defend the accused’s rights to a fair trial.

This study aims to explore the spillover effects of supply chain corruption practices (SCCPs) on stock returns along the supply chain and within the industry. Specifically, it investigates how SCCPs affect the stock returns of corrupt firms' bystander supply chain partners and industry peers, both of which are not involved in the SCCPs.

The authors employ the event study methodology to quantify SCCPs' spillover effects in terms of abnormal stock returns. The analysis is based on 117 SCCPs occurring in China between 2014 and 2021.

The event study results show that SCCPs have negative effects on the stock returns of corrupt firms' bystander supply chain partners. Such negative effects are more pronounced for bystander buyers than bystander suppliers. However, SCCPs do not have a significant impact on the stock returns of corrupt firms' industry peers. Additional analysis further suggests that SCCPs are more likely to affect the stock returns of domestic rather than overseas bystander supply chain partners.

This study is the first attempt to thoroughly examine the spillover effects of SCCPs along the supply chain and within the industry, advancing the understanding of the financial consequences of SCCPs and providing important implications for future research and practices related to supply chain corruption.

This study aims to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of auditor mandatory suspicious activity reporting versus the exercise of professional judgement in the anti-money laundering regimes of the UK and the USA.

The research draws upon the following sources. Firstly, statistics provided by the UK National Crime Agency, 2019 (NCA) regarding suspicious activity report (SAR) filing rates. Secondly, anti-money laundering legislation in the USA and UK. Thirdly, statements made in the political domain in the USA, particularly those which raised constitutional concerns during the progress of the Patriot Act 2001. Finally, statements and recommendations by a UK Parliamentary Commission enquiring into the effectiveness of the suspicious activity reporting regime.

The UK reporting regime does not accommodate professional judgement, resulting in the filing of SARs with limited intelligence value. This contrasts with discretionary reporting in the USA: voluntary reporting guides and influences auditor behaviour rather than mandating it. Defensive filing by UK auditors (defence to anti-money launderings [DAMLs]) has increased in recent years but the number of SARs filed has declined.

The study evaluates auditor behavioural responses to legislative regimes which mandate or alternatively accommodate discretion in the reporting suspicion of money laundering. Consideration of constitutional and judicial activism in this context is a novel contribution to the literature. For its theoretical framework the study uses Foucault’s concept of discipline of the self to evaluate auditor behaviour under both regimes.

The purpose of this study is to examine the corruption prevalent in the distribution of COVID-19 palliatives during the lockdown and movement restrictions in the country. This study seeks to analyse the current state of corruption in the distribution of COVID-19 palliatives and public health facilities in Nigeria while also providing a legal insight and strategic blueprint to combat corruption. To this end, this study will address the current legal framework for combating corruption and build upon this to formulate a working strategy for tackling corruption in the future.

Using a doctrinal legal research methodology, this study draws upon existing literature, tertiary data sources and information from the Nigeria Centre for Disease Control. The collected data is analysed and compared with current literature to identify key findings. Rent-seeking and utilitarian theories of the law were examined to guide this study. This study offers useful insights into combating corruption. The use of this method is justified, as it enhances the credibility of the findings on the importance of strategies for future emergencies. This legal research approach is consistent with the law and can be easily verified. The empirical aspect of this study involved a survey of multidimensional health-care and economic data set of 36 states in Nigeria plus the Federal Capital Territory on COVID-19 in Nigeria. A survey linearised regression model was estimated to determine the influence of government revenue and public health-care facilities in the control of the virus spread in Nigeria.

This study reveals the need for emphasis on the imperative of combating corruption in the distribution of COVID-19 palliatives and establishing economic resilience through transparent and accountable practices, supported by legal frameworks.

Rent-seeking and utilitarian theories of law are evaluated because of their impacts on combating corruption. The limitation of this study is the intricacy of gathering data on COVID-19 palliatives corruption in Nigeria because of secrecy and the absence of reliable data on the subject.

Estimating the exact number of stolen palliatives and their fiscal impact on Nigeria's economy proves to be a formidable task because of the covert nature of corruption. This study equips policymakers in Nigeria with a better understanding of the legal challenges posed by corruption in the health care sector and provides an effective strategy to combat it.

The lack of reliable data on the extent of palliative theft hinders the ability of lawmakers to enact effective legislation and strategies for combating corruption in the distribution of COVID-19 palliatives and addressing future emergencies in Nigeria. The policy implications of this study can assist policymakers in Nigeria and other countries in formulating measures to combat corruption in the distribution of COVID-19 palliatives and other future emergencies. Furthermore, it recommends the overhaul of anti-corruption laws and mechanisms in Nigeria to ensure effective measures against corruption.

In conclusion, this study contributes to knowledge by proposing a legal model centred on people's participation to enhance transparency and accountability in future palliative distribution processes. This study recommends legal strategies that can effectively address corruption in future emergencies or shocks. This study proposes a strategic blueprint to tackle corruption in the future. This blueprint includes an analysis of existing laws and regulations, as well as potential policy changes and legislative reform. This study also includes recommendations for improved enforcement and oversight mechanisms and for improved public awareness and education. As part of this, this study considers the potential for public–private partnerships to increase transparency and accountability in public health and health-care services.

The Scottish Government hope to pilot judge only rape trials to increase the woefully low rape conviction rates in Scotland. The reasoning is that by removing jurors, the court will be attenuating the role that rape myths and other cognitive and social biases have on conviction rates. However, a plethora of research from cognitive and social psychology, legal literature and decision-making science has shown that experts, including judges and other legal professionals, may be no less biased than laypeople. This paper aims to outline the research highlighting that experts may also be biased, why biases in judges can be elicited, and potential alternative recommendations (i.e. deselecting jurors who score highly on rape myths and providing training/education for jurors). Furthermore, piloting with real judges, in real trials, may not be best practice. Therefore, the authors recommend that any piloting is preceded by experimental research.

N/A

Furthermore, piloting with real judges, in real trials, may not be best practice; therefore, the authors recommend that any piloting is preceded by experimental research.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this research is the first of its kind to directly compared the decision-making of jurors and judges within the current Scottish legal context.

This study aims to examine the relationship between medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) among pregnant individuals, referral source, mental health, political affiliation and substance use policies in all 50 states in the USA.

This study describes MOUD receipt among pregnant people with an opioid use disorder (OUD) in 2018. The authors explored sociodemographic differences in MOUD receipt, referrals and co-occurring mental health disorders. The authors included a comparison of MOUD receipt among states that have varying substance use policies and examined the impact of these policies and the political affiliation on MOUD. The authors used multilevel binary logistic regression to examine effects of individual and state-level characteristics on MOUD.

Among 8,790 pregnant admissions with OUD, the majority who received MOUD occurred in the Northeast region (71.52%), and 14.99% were referred by the criminal justice system (n = 1,318). Of those who were self-referred, 66.39% received MOUD, while only 30.8% of referrals from the criminal justice system received MOUD. Those referred from the criminal justice system or who had a co-occurring mental health disorder were least likely to receive MOUD. The multilevel model showed that while policies were not a significant predictor, a state’s political affiliation was a significant predictor of MOUD.

The study has some methodological limitations; a state-level analysis, even when considering the individual factors, may not provide sufficient description of community-level or other social factors that may influence MOUD receipt. This study adds to the growing literature on the ineffectiveness of prenatal substance use policies designed specifically to increase the use of MOUD. If such policies are consistently assessed as not contributing to substantial increase in MOUD among pregnant women over time, it is imperative to investigate potential mechanisms in these policies that may not facilitate MOUD access the way they are intended to.

Findings from this study aid in understanding the impact that a political affiliation may have on treatment access; states that leaned more Democratic were more likely to have higher rates of MOUD, and this finding can lead to research that focuses on how and why this contributes to greater treatment utilization. This study provides estimates of underutilization at a state level and the mechanisms that act as barriers, which is a stronger assessment of how state-specific policies and practices are performing in addressing prenatal substance use and a necessary step in implementing changes that can improve the links between pregnant women and MOUD.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to explore individual-level factors that include mental health and referral sources to treatment that lead to MOUD use in the context of state-level policy and political environments. Most studies estimate national-level rates of treatment use only, which can be useful, but what is necessary is to understand what mechanisms are at work that vary by state. This study also found that while substance use policies were designed to increase MOUD for pregnant women, this was not as prominent a predictor as other factors, like mental health, being referred from the criminal justice system, and living in a state with more Democratic-leaning affiliations.