The Rank of Queen's Counsel: Judicial Perspectives

The rank of queen's counsel, granted under the royal prerogative, has been part of the architecture of the legal profession and legal system since 1594 but has undergone many changes in that time, including most recently the adoption of new selection procedures. Recent cases in Northern Ireland have raised the question - what is the legal position of queen's counsel? By examining decided cases in context, this paper aims to explain judicial perspectives on what it means to be a QC.

Corruption and subsidiary profitability: US MNC subsidiaries in the Asia Pacific region

Would multinational corporation (MNC) subsidiaries be more profitable in host countries where corruption is less severe? Would MNC subsidiaries be more profitable in less corrupt countries if they focus on local sales? This paper examines the impact of the level of corruption on the profitability of US MNCs in the Asia Pacific region. Using foreign direct investment (FDI) data archived by the US Bureau of Economic Analysis and corruption data reported by the World Bank, we find that MNC subsidiaries located in countries with a lower level of corruption are more profitable. In addition, MNC subsidiaries with a greater focus on local sales are more profitable when the corruption level is low. This study contributes to the literature by showing that when local sales are important to MNC subsidiaries, a lower level of corruption by host countries positively affects the profitability of the MNC subsidiaries.

Rewarding Merit in Judicial Appointments?: A research project undertaken by the School of Law, Queen’s University Belfast for the Northern Ireland Judicial Appointments Commission

This research involved carrying out an online survey using a number of vignettes/scenarios to explore understandings and attitudes to judicial appointments. This sort of survey is relatively novel in this context and provided a useful way of understanding how a range of factors such as merit and seniority, career paths and connections, as well as gender and visibility, are perceived as operating within the appointments system. The research also involved a series of focus group interviews with a number of individuals with various professional backgrounds and at different levels of seniority. These, and a limited number of individual interviews, afforded an opportunity to explore more closely some of the themes arising from the scenarios as well as a chance to look in some depth at some of the views and concerns of a range of members of the legal professions.

Building upon the previous research project, this work was less concerned with revisiting earlier themes and more interested in exploring how the idea of “merit” as a governing factor in judicial appointment is seen as working in practice, and whether it is perceived as being most likely to be found within particular career profiles. We also investigated issues such as the possible development of formal and informal pathways to a judicial career and practical problems such as how an applicant might become known to the senior judiciary, and the importance of this. Overall our interest was primarily in developing an understanding of how gender is perceived to operate in the appointments process and how any barriers to recruiting women, particularly to the senior judiciary, could be further broken down.

Banking compliance and dependence corruption: towards an attachment perspective

Why did banking compliance fail so badly in the recent financial crisis and why, according to many, does it continue to do so? Rather than point to the lack of oversight of individuals in bank compliance roles, as many commentators do, in this paper I examine in depth the organizational context that surrounded people in such roles. I focus on those compliance personnel who did speak out about risky practices in their banks, who were forced to escalate the problem and 'whistle-blow' to external parties, and who were punished for doing so. Drawing on recent empirical data from a wider study, I argue that the concept of dependence corruption is useful in this setting, and that it can be extended to encompass interpersonal attachments. This, in turn, problematises the concept of dependence corruption because interpersonal attachments in organisational settings are inevitable. The paper engages with recent debates on whether institutional corruption is an appropriate lens for studying private-sector organisations by arguing for a focus on roles, rather than remaining at the level of institutional fields or individual organisations. Finally, the paper contributes to studies on banking compliance in the context of the recent crisis; without a deeper understanding of those who were forced to extremes to simply do their jobs, reform of the banking sector will prove difficult.

Getting Away With It:Corruption, Moral Indignation and the Limits of Legal Accountability

In this paper we address the idea of ‘legal but corrupt’ through a discussion of two cases: abuse scandals in the Irish Catholic Church and the financial services industry in the wake of the Global Financial Crisis. We identify two important dynamics that generated the scandals: that they were driven by strong and stable groups existing within a peculiar kind of ‘accountability space’ that we describe as ‘monastic’ and that those groups persisted with tacit or explicit support from the state. ‘Legal but corrupt’ is, we argue, a matter of insider incomprehension sustained by the ceding of sovereignty over some aspect of social or economic life.

The Corruption of Accountability

Our discussion focuses on the state’s ceding administrative power to special claimants for the state’s inattention. Legal corruption, by our lights, is less about explicit or implicit exchange relationships, and more about law being employed to carve out spaces where the state actively cedes spaces to private ‘sovereigns’ – sovereigns within the space, after it has been carved out – where they can regulate themselves as they see fit and where they can project their power over others without the state stepping in.

Reasoning Rights: Comparative judicial engagement

This edited book is about comparative reasoning in human rights cases, exploring the questions: How is it that notionally universal norms are reasoned by courts in such dramatically different ways? What is the shape of this reasoning? What techniques are common across the transnational jurisprudence? What techniques are diverse? With contributions by a team of world-leading human rights scholars, the book moves beyond simply addressing the institutional questions concerning courts and human rights, which too often dominate discussions of this kind. Instead, it seeks a deeper examination of the similarities and divergence in the content of reasons being developed by different courts when addressing comparable human rights questions. These differences, while partly influenced by institutional issues, cannot be attributable to them alone. The book explores the diverse and rich underlying spectrum of human rights reasoning, as a distinctive and particular form of legal reasoning, evident in the case studies across the selected jurisdictions. It is a fascinating study for all those interested in human rights law and legal reasoning.