Magister Legum - LLM / Today corruption is a major concern for most countries.1 Civil forfeiture of the proceeds of corruption has been embraced as a key strategy by many states in recovering public funds lost through corruption.2 It may be defined as a remedial statutory device designed to recover the proceeds of a crime as well as its instrumentalities.3 Originally, asset recovery regimes adopted by most states were predominantly criminal forfeiture. This mode of forfeiture is preceded by a conviction, after which the state takes possession of the proceeds of the crime from a convicted individual.4 Its proceedings are in personam and the standard of proof is proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Thus, actual forfeiture only takes place after the issue of a conviction order. As a consequence, it is always lengthy and often results in delayed realisation of the proceeds of crime. 5 The inherent weaknesses of criminal forfeiture gave birth to the idea of developing a civil forfeiture system.6 This mode is different from the former in that its proceedings are in rem. Hence the standard of proof is proof on a balance of probabilities and a conviction order is not required.7

Ce travail propose une analyse comparée portant sur la construction d’Haïti en tant queproblème public en Jamaïque et en Guadeloupe au cours des années 2000. Un premierfacteur de politisation observé dans ces deux territoires repose sur l’altérisation desHaïtiens par le biais de normes héritées de l’idéologie raciale coloniale et se traduit pard’importantes mobilisations contre les immigrés haïtiens. Un deuxième typed’intervention dans le champ politique relève au contraire de pratiques d’opposition audiscours colonial et tend à présenter la première République noire comme le symboled’une appartenance commune forgée dans la lutte contre l’hégémonie occidentale. Cetteconflictualité identitaire est resituée à l’aune du fond imaginaire racialisé hérité de lasociété de plantation et au croisement des modèles institutionnels mis en oeuvre après ladécolonisation en Jamaïque et en Guadeloupe. En retraçant la trajectoire du « problèmehaïtien », l’enquête engage une réflexion sur la production du politique dans l’espacecaribéen. Elle s’attache à montrer en quoi les antagonismes socio-raciaux exprimés dansles sociétés à fondement esclavagiste informent et travaillent l’action pol itique qui yprend place. La première partie revient sur l’invention de la figure racisée du « barbarehaïtien » dans l’espace Atlantique et son usage par les puissances occidentales en tantqu’outil de légitimation de l’ordre colonial en Jamaïque et en Guadeloupe. La deuxièmepartie s’intéresse à la manière dont ces stéréotypes raciaux sont réactivés dans les deuxterritoires durant les années 2000 à travers la politisation de l’immigration haïtienne etsa mise à l’agenda auprès des pouvoirs publics. En troisième lieu, les interactions quifaçonnent les énoncés officiels du « problème haïtien » sont saisies au prisme desinstruments de l’action publique mis en place afin de réguler, contrôler et mettre àl’écart les corps haïtiens. Cette recherche invite à aborder, par le biais de l’exemplecaribéen, les fondements de l’articulation entre identités raciales, production dupolitique, pratiques du pouvoir et modes de gouvernementalité. Elle met en évidence lalongévité des schèmes de pensée issus de la domination coloniale, tout en soulignant lacapacité des acteurs à en renégocier le contenu à travers le conflit politique. / This research project proposes a comparative analysis regarding the construction ofHaiti as a public problem in Jamaica and in Guadeloupe during the 2000s. A first factorof politicisation observed in both territories is based on the process of othering theHaitians through norms inherited from racist ideology and reflected in significantmobilisations against Haitian migrants. A second type of intervention in the politicalarena is conversely related to oppositional practices towards the colonial discourse andtends to present the first Black Republic as a symbol of common belonging shapedthrough struggles against Western hegemony. This source of identity-based conflicts islocated in the light of a racialised imaginary inherited from plantation society and at theintersection of the institutional models implemented after decolonisation in Jamaica andin Guadeloupe. By recounting the career of the “Haitian problem”, this survey reflectson the production of politics in the Caribbean space as from its margins. It aims atshowing how social and racial antagonisms expressed in societies founded on slaveryshape and fashion local political action. The first part sheds a light on the invention ofthe racialised representation of the “Haitian barbarian” in the Atlantic space and its useas a tool for legitimating the colonial order in Jamaican and in Guadeloupe by Westernpowers. The second part addresses the way in which these racial stereotypes werereactivated in both territories during the 2000s through the politicisation of Haitianimmigration as well as its placement on the policy agenda. Third, the interactions thatshape official narratives related to the “Haitian problem” are grasped through the lens ofpolicy instruments implemented in order to regulate, control and exclude Haitian bodies.Based on the Caribbean example, this research invites to discuss the way racialidentities, politics, power practices and governmentalities relate and are articulatedaltogether. It highlights the longevity of thinking patterns derived from colonialdomination, while emphasising the capacity of actors to renegotiate their contentthrough political conflict.

Along with industrial and economic growth there is a persistent risk of permanently increasing air pollution. Air pollution has especially grown in the second half of the 20th century due to intense development of energy, industry and transport sectors. These pollution sources still remain the largest air polluters. Solvents, paints, glues, ink and other substances, emitting volatile organic compounds to air are used in such industries like reel, metal and wood coating, covering with glue sticks, footwear production, production of pharmaceutical products, printing, dry (chemical) surface cleaning etc. Emissions of volatile organic compounds make harm both to people and environment as well as damage the ozone layer. Volatile organic compounds also affect smog formation and green house effect. In the paper it is hypothesised that after implementation of EU legislation, observing the given emission limit values, improving technologies and implementing new treatment technologies, applying the measures to reduce pollution with volatile organic compounds and replacing the materials, emitting volatile organic compounds, with less polluting ones or those without pollution, air emission of volatile organic compounds will reduce dramatically. This master’s paper reviews the measures and ways to manage pollution with volatile organic compounds (VOC): directives and their requirements, transferred to the national laws of the member states, addressed to solve the VOC pollution problem... [to full text]