Effective implementation of the European Water Framework Directive (WFD) is dependent on Member States’ national water institutions and organizations, often designated as ‘competent authorities’. Although substantial research relating to the Directive itself has been carried out, less is known about the extent to which competent authorities have the organizational capacity to deliver it. The literature notes that conceptual understanding of capacity has been hampered by lack of definitional clarity making both its management and assessment challenging. In this contribution, several conceptualizations of organizational capacity found in the literature are used to construct a set of core qualitative organizational components that encourage analysts to consider the ways in which legal authority, information and knowledge, skills, resources and leadership shape a competent authority’s ability to deliver the WFD. Malta, the smallest European Member State, is the case study used to test the application of these components. Qualitative empirical data collected from policy documents, face-to-face semi-structured interviews and online news media articles, provided the evidence to thematically explore and evaluate the Maltese competent authorities’ organizational capacity across the implementation of three main WFD provisions that are in focus: Article 8, 9 and 14. As a result, the core components of organizational capacity are expanded and refined to produce an organizational capacity thematic map. The results show that competent authorities experience influences across the institutional frameworks they work in as well as external factors (primarily political). The results also support the idea of the organizational capacity components being highly interlinked and the presence (or lack thereof) of one component having knock-on effects on others within an organization. The combination of these two factors highly affect management options and outcomes in the implementation of the WFD. In the small state context of Malta these highlight the need to channel support in a coordinated manner from European counterparts to the Maltese water network. In turn, the water network can have positive knock-on effects on the organizational capacity of the Maltese competent authorities, which currently struggle to perform and seize available opportunities due to low possession of human resources and time availability. The approach and findings presented in this research provide a mechanism and evidence base that can facilitate bilateral discussions between Member States as well as with the European Commission, and help inform the WFD review process planned by end of 2019.

Department of Criminal Justice and Procedure / Money laundering (ML) evolves in tandem with global technological advancement. This phenomenon calls for multi-faceted responsive measures at national and international levels to combat this nefarious crime.1 Today, combating ML requires co-operation among, inter alia, financial intelligence units (FIUs), reporting institutions, law enforcement agencies, the judiciary, as well as inter-state co-operation. In response to the ML threat, Kenya has adopted comprehensive anti-money laundering (AML) laws, such as the Proceeds of Crime and Anti- Money Laundering Act No. 9 of 2009 (POCAMLA) and the Prevention of Terrorism Act No. 30 of 2012. These, among other statutes, constitute the principal arsenal of the AML legal framework.

På finansmarknaden finns det flera olika typer finansiella instrument och utbudet ökar stadigt. Utvecklingen har lett till att det har blivit svårare för icke-professionella kunder att utvärdera riskerna med instrumenten. Vissa finansiella instrument som finns på marknaden är så kallade finansiella derivatinstrument, vars värde beror på en underliggande tillgångs värdeutveckling. En ny reglering om produktgodkännande av finansiella instrument introducerades genom Europaparlamentets och rådets direktiv 2014/65/EU. Processen för produktgodkännande är reglerad i 8 kap. 13 § lag (2007:528) om värdepappersmarknaden. Regleringen innebär att, värdepappersinstitut måste ha en välordnad process för godkännande av egenproducerade finansiella instrument innan marknadsföring eller distribution till kund får ske. I och med Europaparlamentets och rådets direktiv 2014/65/EU och Europaparlamentets och rådets förordning (EU) nr 600/2014, har nationella behöriga myndigheter och Esma erhållit befogenhet att utföra produktingripanden. Syftet med produktingripanden är att skydda ickeprofessionella kunder från produkter på finansmarknaden som är riskfyllda och har svårbedömda egenskaper. Esma har nyligen publicerat ett åtgärdsförslag avseende begränsningar av marknadsföring, distribution och försäljning av contracts for difference samt ett förbud av marknadsföring, distribution och försäljning av binära optioner till ickeprofessionella kunder. I uppsatsen visas att produktingripanden är ett verktyg som kan komma att gynna både nationella behöriga myndigheter och Esma i tillsynsarbetet, i syfte att stärka investerarskyddet för icke-professionella kunder. Samarbetet mellan Esma och nationella behöriga myndigheter bör även utvecklas för att genomdriva framtida åtgärdsförslag. Åtgärdsförslag bör främst vara antagna av Esma för att därefter antas av nationella behöriga myndigheter inom EU. Genom ett sådant tillvägagångssätt kan harmoniseringsarbetet, avseende regleringen av kapitalmarknaden i EU, fortsätta på ett ändamålsenligt sätt. I uppsatsen visas även att Esma:s nuvarande åtgärdsförslag, angående begränsningar och förbud av marknadsföring, distribution och försäljning av contracts for difference och binära optioner, är ett välgrundat förslag med beaktande av de risker som icke-professionella kunder utsätts för vid handel av dessa riskfyllda finansiella derivatinstrument.

De nos jours, la coopération entre les superviseurs financiers dans l’Union européenne constitue une nécessité apparente. En effet, l’harmonisation progressive des législations des Etats membres, la mise en place du passeport européen pour faciliter la libre circulation des acteurs au sein de l’Union, la compétence nationale fondée sur le principe du pays d’origine, ainsi que la reconnaissance mutuelle des agréments et des contrôles ont rendu nécessaire la coopération entre les superviseurs financiers des Etats membres. Cette nécessité constitue une conséquence logique de l’intégration financière. D'une part, l'existence de règles communes exige une approche cohérente dans leur mise en oeuvre à travers de l'Union européenne. D'autre part, la portée croissante d'activités transfrontalières, ensemble avec l’émergence de grands établissements financiers prestant des services dans plusieurs secteurs d’activité, exige la coopération étroite entre les superviseurs financiers. En effet, dans un contexte transfrontalier et intersectoriel, la coopération constitue le principal outil de surveillance des autorités de contrôle financier. Ce processus est en plein mutation depuis l’avènement de la crise financière. Ainsi, la coopération est renforcée et centralisée à l’échelle de l’Union depuis la mise en place des Autorités européennes de surveillance. En outre, la centralisation de la supervision dans le secteur bancaire au niveau européen ne supprime pas la nécessité de coopération, en particulier en raison de l’expertise des autorités nationales, de leur connaissance des marchés bancaires nationaux, régionaux et locaux, des ressources importantes dont elles disposent déjà et de considérations géographiques et linguistiques. / Nowadays, the cooperation among the financial supervisors in the European Union is a visible necessity. The progressive harmonisation of the legislations of the Member states, the establishment of the European passport in order to facilitate the free movement of actors within the Union, the national competence based on the principle of the country of origin, as well as the mutual recognition of the authorisation procedure and of the controls made necessary the cooperation among financial supervisors in Europe. This necessity is a logical consequence of the financial integration. First, the existence of common rules requires a coherent approach in their implementation thought the European Union. Second, the increasing number of cross-border activities, as well as the emergence of big financial institutions active in several business sectors requires a close relationship between financial supervisors. In a cross-border and intersectoral context the cooperation becomes the main tool of supervision of the financial authorities. This process is in height transformation since the advent of the financial crisis. The cooperation is strengthened and centralised on European level since the establishment of the European Supervisory Authorities. In addition, the centralisation of the supervision in the banking sector at European level does not eliminate the necessity of cooperation, due in particular to the expertise of national authorities, to their knowledge of national, regional and local banking markets, their significant existing resources and to locational and language considerations.