I recommend reading his blog at hEaD space
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/418b5/418b5ac862eb924141daffd8315c67ce3d7aaf73" alt="Share/Bookmark"
Graduate studies and research in the School of Law at Westminster
UKCLE's Ideas on the Future of Legal Education
Dear all
At the 43rd gathering of the Philosophical Foundations of Law and Finance, on Friday 26 February 2010, from 6.00 to 8.00pm, in room 5.16, 309 Regent Street (University of Westminster), we begin to talk about the concept of God, faith, sacrifice, death – all in relation to finance and law.
1. The most significant popular philosopher post-Kant is Kierkegaard. He is the most approachable for his passion and examination of the subcutaneous doubt that nicks our daily stream of consciousness.
2. Kierkegaard also fits the Heideggerian programme of reaching into the originary meanings – and in Joe’s opinion, he is much better than Heidegger at achieving a synthesis of Greek meaning and method applied to the modern period where questions of faith are translated into the expected sameness and certainty of global financial transactions. He captures the ultimate unconscious fear that what we do every day is on the brink of fatal collapse.
3. We will begin reading Fear and Trembling, see: http://www.religion-online.org/showbook.asp?title=2068
As usual at 8.00pm we will move to Vapiano (19-21 Great Portland Street, W1W 8QB) seeking relief from such mystifying meditations.
See you on Friday!
Best,
Joe and Laura
Philosophical Foundations of Law and Finance - 43rd Weekly Meeting
The legal profession currently consists of some 16,455 barristers, 112,246 solicitors and 12,200 individuals authorised to operate in other aspects of the legal profession such as conveyancing. The sector has been valued at £25.97 billion per annum. In total the legal sector employed 323,000 individuals in 2008. [ONS]With this kind of money and the numbers of people involved in legal services, there is plenty of incentive for some creative thinking in this future market. Now, question: will it be a matter of who gets there first or will the fast second ultimately win?
The Legal Services Board Has Spoken
Let a Thousand Flowers Bloom...Already?
19 February PFLF: Proceedings
A Complex Dance of the Market and Law
This essay starts off as a response to an interview on CNN-IBN (in India) of Dr. Sen, a medical professional and human rights activist adopted by Amnesty as a “prisoner of conscience”. The essay goes on to examine the reasons for the Indian media’s attempts to gag voices of dissent against the widespread human rights violations and state violence against indigenous people (Adivasis), and marginalised castes (Dalits) in India following free market economic reforms. The Indian media has prevented open debate on the Government of India’s Operation Green Hunt, a military operation launched against popular resistance to the Government’s economic policies in Eastern India.The essay goes on to discusses the difference between institutional and individual violence, mercantilist violence and defensive violence by people of the land, and draws on the Buddha’s teachings to comment on breaking the cycle of violence in India.
This essay responds to current debates in India on the Government of India’s military operation in Eastern India, Operation Green Hunt, targeting indigenous peoples (Adivasis) and Dalits (marginalised castes). The Government’s rationale is that these regions are ‘Maoist infested’ and that Maoism is the biggest security threat that India faces at present. Many academics and intellectuals seek to take a position of ‘equidistance’ arguing that the Adivasis and Dalits are victims caught in the cross-fire between the state and the Maoists. This essay argues that it is the academics and intellectuals who are ‘sandwiched’ between the state and the rural poor in India’s polarised society.
"Sandwich Theory" and the Political Economy of Non-Violence in India
Philosophical Foundations of Law and Finance--42nd Meeting
Justice and Home Affairs remains one of the most intriguing policy areas of the European Union. It is exactly where the worlds collide. On the one hand we witness an ever growing need for closer co-operation between the Member States, on the other, we can't fail to see their natural reluctance to give up one of the last castles of sovereignty (as perceived by some in rather XIX century terms). Arguably, this creates lot of new phenomena. The post-Amsterdam developments have proven that the Member States tend to behave like prisoners in paradise, at the same time very close and very far from one another. In one - more or less chaotic move - they unanimously agree to a new piece of legislation giving the principle of mutual recognition in the area of criminal law a real meaning, but - in the very next move - they fail to give such law effect and remain strongly opposed to the ECJ's teological interpretation of law. Notorious delays in the transposition and implementation of third pillar legislation remain an every day feature of the Police and Judicial Co-operation in Criminal Matters. The situation is considerably different in the remaining JHA areas, which - in a rather desperate late 1990s charade - were moved to the first pillar of the EU. Yet, while the transposition record remains satisfactory, the Member States still remain trapped by this real conundrum - how to reconcile the need for closer integration with ghosts of sovereignty, that is perceived in a very traditional fashion. Ten years after the European Council proclaimed the plan for the Area of Freedom Security and Justice it seems fitting to take a critical look at the developments of the last decade. Many things have changed for good, that's clear. The European Union is now composed of twenty seven Member States, the internal market seems to be working, yet the attempt to constitutionalize the European Union has taken quite unprecedented turns. Quite a number of legal acts dealing with JHA matters has been adopted in course of the last decade. In a way, this is testing the limits and potential of the European Union and, at the same time, the ability of the Member States to take seriously their obligations stemming from the EU Treaty. The main argument of this paper presupposes that the Member States behave a bit like prisoners in paradise, too afraid to take further moves to get closer with one another, yet quite aware of the need to proceed in such direction. Consequentially, the end result is an attempt to reconcile those two factors. Such reluctance, hesitation, lack of consequence and - at times - illogical and slightly schizophrenic behaviour remain the idiosyncrasies of the Justice and Home Affairs Area. Whether this is a typical child disease, which is curable and will disappear sometime as the child grows or it will become one of the qualities of an adult, remains to be seen. For the time being, this remains of the central features of policy making, affecting the effectiveness and usefulness of its products. The question is if the new framework introduced by the Treaty of Lisbon is the right panacea for this child disease.
Prisoners in Paradise: EU Member States, Justice and Home Affairs and the Lisbon Treaty
Prof Hilary Sommerlad Leeds Metropolitan University H.sommerlad@leedsmet.ac.uk | |
Dr Daniel Muzio University of Leeds dm@lubs.leeds.ac.uk | Dr Jennifer Tomlinson University of Leeds jt@ubs.leeds.ac.uk |
Ms Liz Duff University of Westminster duffl@westminster.ac.uk | Dr Lisa Webley University of Westminster l.webley@westminster.ac.uk |
What Makes the Legal Profession Diverse--Or Not?
PhD Studentships at Westminster
The 41th Session of the Philosophical Foundations of Law and Finance on Friday, February 12th will focus on the evolution of money market funds and their significance to the normal functioning of global capital markets. MMFs have been around for more than 35 years representing about 1/3 of assets under management of collective investment schemes, or mutual funds in the U.S. language, and yet, remained largely unknown to the general public. Not until September 2008, when a run on the third world-largest MMF triggered a global liquidity squeeze resulting in the Great Recession.
We will take a bird-view of the money market fund landscape on the both sides of the Ocean. A symbolic reading of the title contrasts between light and dark, portfolio transparency and a lack of information. Comparisons will be also made between MMF regulation in the U.S. and conflicting views on what constitutes a money market fund among European regulators.
We will review MMF definitions that are currently in effect along with various MMF industry proposals, including those put forward by the SEC in the U.S. and IMMFA, EFAMA, and CESR in Europe. There is a high level of cooperation amongst all interested parties in supporting the primary goal of establishing a common definition of European MMFs. Will the regulators arrive to a solution equally workable for investors and the industry is remained to be seen.
The CESR Consultation Paper “A common definition of European money market funds” is available at http://www.cesr-eu.org/popup2.php?id=6141
European Money Market Funds: Definition in the Heart of Darkness