Qui tam is the process whereby an individual sues or prosecutes in the name of the government and shares in the proceeds of any successful litigation or settlement. The Latin name points to the long history of the legislation, which was created in the ancient times. The qui tam authorises private citizens with non-public information relating to the fraud to bring suit on behalf of the government even without prosecutorial endorsement. Qui tam is generally a civil procedure, and the individual need not have been a victim of the misconduct. The aim of this research is to contribute to the original knowledge by providing an analysis of the qui tam legal concept in its historical evolution in a space of time through two millennia, with main focus on two primary common law jurisdictions – the United Kingdom and USA. The hypothesis underlying the research is that under certain conditions pursuing goal to better and more efficiently exercise some of its functions the state following qualitative changes in a socio-economic environment may delegate part of its authority to the citizens, and provide them with selectively adopted set of pecuniary and non-pecuniary incentives to accept this authority. The hypothesis is tried with analysis from the following perspectives: macro level - state regulatory practice, and socio-economic development; corporate level -- cost of compliance, and corporate response; basic level -- personal motives, and risks for actual and potential whistleblowers. The conceptual framework applied is based on the economic analysis of law, which focuses on the economic efficiency of legal rules. The starting point of the research is the assumptions that legal rules ought to be efficient, and that individuals respond to legal rules economically. However the analysis goes beyond the fundamentalist strong-form rationality assumption, which implies that economic agents always make choices that maximise their own welfare. For the purposes of this research, the people are viewed as weakly rational – rational, but subject to some consistent deviations. Methodologically the research borrows from the behavioural economic theory its attention to such factors as frame dependence and inefficient markets. The analysis shows that qui tam regulations have decentralised the problem of enforcement, which apart from tackling the inevitable bureaucratic inaptitude, significantly reduces its costs. With respect to more traditional forms of monitoring and regulatory control such a system has proven to offer solid advantages. First of all, it does not require setting up a costly structure. The financial sophistication, and organisational complexity, combined with technical ingenuity and elaboration of the contemporary big business present a cognitive challenge for the investigative and prosecutorial agencies. To investigate white-collar crime they have to spend increasingly huge resources, both financial and intellectual. The relative scarcity of these resources in the post-crisis developed economies has paved way for the qui tam legislation to give governments chance to catch up. From the narrow regulatory point of view, the bounty system imposes a downward shift in costs of compliance – from the regulator to a corporate level, – because it does not require significant increase in regulators’ staff and budgets. The macroeconomic approach, which focuses on the costs and benefits on a much wider scale, brings in a more complicated picture, when potential short-term increase in costs on a corporate level are offset on a longer-term time scale by rising economic efficiency as a result of reduced losses through corporate fraud and government imposed fines, increased public trust, and improved corporate governance. From the point of view of the lawmakers, by creating competition for enforcement, qui tam laws reduce the chances that the potential enforcer is bought off, thus providing some additional efficiency through the dual enforcement model. This leads the research to conclude on the motives and logic that stand behind the state, which in such way delegates part of its authority: the qui tam have always been popular with ruling classes for the same reason in the past as well as at present times – under public pressure to prosecute more effectively misdeeds and fraud the society decries as inacceptable, legislative bodies enhance qui tam, when they consider the enforcement of some law beyond the unaided capacity, or interest of law enforcement officials.

No description available.

While EU accession has been generally regarded as a highly successful process of policy, and institutional model diffusion, after the 2007 enlargement wave anxiety regarding post-accession backsliding in the case of Romania and Bulgaria has raised the question of whether the impact of pre-accession conditionality is sustainable once membership is achieved. Against this background, the present thesis investigates the manner in which the two countries have abided by their obligations as EU members, while taking into consideration the particular effects generated by separate modes of governance and legal instruments. The thesis follows infringement cases initiated by the Commission against the two states, examines policy responses under the Europe 2020 Strategy, and explores the steps made by Romania and Bulgaria to fulfil the Cooperation and Verification Mechanism benchmarks. By researching compliance with hard law, as well as openness towards coordination mechanisms we are provided with a more comprehensive outlook over national engagement with both legally-binding commitments and voluntary action. Based on the obtained results, the thesis argues that lock-in effects with regards to institutional reforms conducted prior to the 2007 enlargement have anchored Romania in the face of political volatility. In the case of Bulgaria, the thesis contends that missed opportunities during the pre-accession phase have placed the country into an institutional stalemate. While backsliding has not been observed, little progress in reforming its judiciary has triggered successive appeals from the European Commission for concrete outcomes.

This thesis compares two courts of Mixed Commission for the suppression of the slave trade in two notorious slave trading ports: Havana and Rio de Janeiro. Treaties, through which Britain imposed slave trade laws, led to the establishment of bilateral Mixed Commissions courts for the suppression of the slave trade in several Atlantic ports in the early nineteenth century. The Commissions have generally been viewed by scholars as important, but precursory to effective abolition of the slave trade; institutions which did not deter slave traders. Here the impact of these courts is addressed principally through the study of the liberated Africans or “recaptives” who the courts were intended to free. It demonstrates the potential and legacy of the Mixed Commissions in light of British reluctance to sabotage economic dominance, despite its dedication to eradicating the slave trade. Drawing on research in archives in Britain, Brazil and Cuba it highlights the importance of addressing local socio-economic circumstances and British imperial policy and objectives in each place, as well as viewing the courts as part of a wider Atlantic system. In doing so it reveals the challenges that the courts represented to slave traders and slave societies during the zenith of the slave trade to both locations.

This thesis examines the impact of the adoption of legislation premised upon the ‘self-declaration model’ of legal gender recognition, which allows legal subjects to make a personal declaration of their gender status and have this granted legal effect. It presents findings from an in-depth fieldwork visit to interrogate how self-declaration is working in Denmark, the first European state to have adopted it in June 2014. These findings draw upon doctrinal analysis of various legislative materials, including parliamentary debates, as well as empirical interviews conducted with 33 respondents – including trans people, activists, politicians, civil servants, and medical practitioners – over the course of the three-month visit. These interviews sought to establish how respondents were professionally involved in, or personally affected by, the process of these reforms. By reading this interview material through a Foucauldian framework which brings socio-, feminist, and trans legal scholarship on embodiment and governance together in an innovative manner, the thesis provides the first empirically-based and theoretically-informed analysis of how self-declaration of legal gender status is working in practice. It argues that jurisdictional boundaries were established and maintained throughout the reform process, limiting the implementation of self-declaration to the administrative sphere. Authorising these boundaries between civil and medical institutions had serious consequences for trans people’s legal consciousness; as a restriction of access to body modification technologies could be justified at the same point in time as the regulations around amending legal gender status were being liberalised. With the list of states that have adopted the self-declaration model now including Argentina, Malta, Colombia, the Republic of Ireland, and Norway – and with Sweden and now the United Kingdom apparently on course to follow – this intervention offers activists and policymakers critical insights which might shape how they respond to these, and other, reform proposals in the future.

The hypothesis of this thesis is that hidden behind the European legal approach to issues of Immigration and asylum is the deeply embedded European philosophy of exclusion. The thesis argues that exclusion has its roots in historical interpretations of Difference and Otherness. It is cyclical in nature, and the identity of groups targeted for exclusion changes over time. The thesis argues that the practice of exclusion has been honed and perfected into a societal norm from which exclusionary law claims legitimacy. It goes on to develop the idea that exclusion is a reflection of a deeper societal unease rooted somewhere in European history culture and philosophy, the influence of which continues to have a deleterious effect on contemporary attitudes towards immigration and asylum, and on the corresponding laws of the European Union and its member states. Whilst law indicates the methods and grounds of exclusion it does not indicate the philosophy and psyche behind the law. In order to test the hypothesis, the thesis explores the social and legal history of exclusion in Europe from the 19th century to the present time. It strives to establish the identities of the excluded in the pre-first World War European Empires, and suggests that they were essentially defined by their Europeanness, and often based on internecine conflict. The thesis goes on to look for similarities in the identities of the excluded of the interwar years, and notes how issues of race resurfaced to form a new ideology. The chronology continues by exploring the post Second World War period, and notes how the identities of those who occupied the symbolic space of exclusion evolved from an essentially European identity, to new non-European characteristics, linked to the rise of non-European immigration. The thesis therefore suggests that Difference, Otherness and Exclusion have evolved into a societal norm from which exclusionary law claims legitimacy. It suggests that the concepts of Difference Otherness and Exclusion continue to influence contemporary society, and suggests that Europe remains preoccupied with issues of identity and of responding to these issues in a traditional exclusionary manner. Finally the thesis begins to consider whether the animosity and mistrust previously reserved for the European Jewry is now being re-focused on Europe’s Muslim community. It asks if the restrictions on the entry into Europe of those fleeing conflict in the Middle East, and of those who hail from the Indian sub-continent and who wish to settle in Europe, are an expression of a new cycle of exclusionary practice where only the identity of the excluded has changed. Therefore the thesis aims to contribute to knowledge by re-visiting some of the ambiguities inherent in European history, law and society; and challenge assumptions of what gives rise to pejorative attitudes towards immigration and asylum. Through the exercise of independent critical analysis it aims at a new interpretation of known facts. By applying theoretical interpretations to historical and contemporary narrative, the thesis seeks to demonstrate that the identity of the excluded is seldom static, and advances the idea that exclusion, based on ethnicity or religion or gender - the list is not exhaustive – has cyclical characteristics. In terms of law and scholarship it is of societal benefit to understand who were the excluded of the past – and why; who are the currently excluded – and why; and how, given an understanding of the past and the present, it may be possible to forecast who are to be the future excluded, and why this might be so.

This thesis is about the origins and development of freedom of information laws. The number of countries with these laws has risen dramatically in recent decades, and now stands at around ninety. This is widely taken as evidence that governments across the world are converging in their institutional arrangements because they face similar challenges and demands. Access to information is increasingly claimed to be a human right, essential to the effective functioning of democracy and fundamental to legitimate public administration in the information age. This thesis seeks to challenge this assumed causal homogeneity by explaining why countries in which these principles were well-entrenched legislated at different times. The explanation offered here emphasises institutions: the manner in which important political actors are organised, and the structure of authority and accountability relations between them. It shows that differences in these institutional arrangements meant access laws were introduced at different times in different countries because they were introduced for different reasons and in response to different pressures. It supports these claims by conducting a comparative historical study of freedom of information in Sweden, the USA, France, the UK and Germany. This thesis contributes to empirically-oriented scholarship on a prominent aspect of contemporary government. It provides a framework for further rigorous comparative scholarship. It also provides detailed accounts of how access developed in two countries which have not received much attention in English-language scholarship, France and Germany, and original insights into three others about which more has been written. Whether one is interested in improving actually-existing laws or understanding democratic government in the information age, this study is valuable because it complements visions of why transparency laws are desirable with historically-informed comparative knowledge about why they are introduced at all.

Proportionality is used by the UK Courts when reviewing the Convention-compatibility of the activities of the other branches of government. There are two related problems with the current analysis of proportionality. First, there has been a heavy emphasis on the division of constitutional space between the judiciary and the other branches of government. This focus on spatial conceptions of institutional responsibility has distracted attention from the structure of the relationship between proportionality and deference. The second problem is that there has been insufficient attention paid to the manner in which the test is affected by the distinctions between the different governmental institutions which can be judicially reviewed under the HRA. The individual stages of proportionality are based on certain premises about the institution being reviewed. This needs to be explicit if a sophisticated understanding of proportionality is to be developed. I plan to overcome these two problems by setting out a structural, institutionally sensitive model of proportionality and deference. The model is structural in that it takes account of the operation of deference within the process of proportionality. The model is institutionally sensitive in that it takes account of the differences between the institutions which the courts can review under the HRA. The model is based on the work of Alexy, but adapted for the UK context and developed to make it institutionally sensitive. I trace the operation of this structural model through three institution-specific case studies in order to establish its relevance in the UK. The case studies concern administrative decision-making in immigration cases, rule-making in criminal justice cases and judgments concerning both administrative decisions and legislation in housing cases. This diverse range of subject matter provides the basis for proving the applicability of the structural, institutionally sensitive model, which overcomes the two related problems with the existing analysis.

My thesis critically examines whether Malaysian laws on Muslim women’s rights are harmonious with the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (Women’s Convention). I argue that the interpretation of ‘equality’ is the key to constructing the possibilities of harmonisation. In my conceptual analysis of rights in Islamic and international legal jurisdictions and declarations and in feminist discourse, I argue that both Islamic and international legal jurisprudences present rights as an instrument for equality among human beings. I argue that the principles of equality according to the Islamic jurisprudence and feminists’ standpoint are harmonious. I argue that Malaysia has taken appropriate measures, including laws, policies, administrative decisions and programmes, to eliminate women’s disadvantages based on the principal areas of concern and recommendations made by the CEDAW in its Thirty-Fifth Session. However, there are a few areas that need specific improvement for the betterment of the laws, policies, administrative decisions and programmes in securing Muslim women’s equality rights. I explore whether reservation of Article 16 (1) (a), (c), (f) and (g), pertaining to different entitlements to rights for women and men in Muslim marriage and family relations entered by the Malaysian Government to ensure the prevalence of Shariah practised in Malaysia, renders Malaysian Muslim women’s rights laws irreconcilable with the principle of equality underpinning the Women’s Convention. I argue that Malaysian laws may become harmonious with the Women’s Convention through a womanist interpretation of Shariah, and the empowerment of the rights-bearer within the Women’s Convention’s wider objectives.

Gurdwara legislation, Gurdwara management and institutions of Sikh leadership affect all Sikhs and are in existence to uphold and perpetuate Sikh religious traditions and values. This study is a historical and theological evaluation of the Sikh Gurdwaras Act, which was a secular legislation introduced in 1925 by the British administration in India. It evolved as a response to the Gurdwara Reform Movement, which was a religiously motivated struggle, to provide a scheme of management for Gurdwaras. The study constructs a narrative which evaluates the historical context and factors leading to the creation of the Act. Through a theological evaluation which engages in the interpretation and application of the Sikh Sacred Scriptures, the study then highlights that there is a contradiction which should not exist between: the content and implementation of the Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1925; the constitution and actions of Sikh leadership institutions (the SGPC and the SAD); and between the theological teachings of the Sikh Dharam. The study ultimately suggests that there is need for the Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1925 to be redeveloped so that Gurdwara legislation, Gurdwara management and institutions of Sikh leadership epitomise and are a more authentic reflection of the teachings within the Sikh Sacred Scriptures.