Search results

This article presents our experiences of conducting research interviews with Australian academics, in order to reflect on the politics of researcher and participant positionality. In particular, we are interested in the ways that academic networks, hierarchies and cultures, together with mobility in the higher education sector, contribute to a complex discursive terrain in which researchers and participants alike must maintain vigilance about where they ‘put their feet’ in research interviews. We consider the implications for higher education research, arguing that the positionality of researchers and participants pervades and exceeds these specialised research situations.

The purpose of this paper is to consider how researcher positionality is reconfigured by internet use.

Drawing on recent ethnographic studies conducted in Australia and Canada, the paper considers here how participant agency is symbolically and materially enacted through technology use.

The use of information communication technologies by researchers, research participants and industry partners in online information searching, and the production and dissemination of text poses challenges to conventional assumptions of unequal power relations in research sites.

The paper explores methodological, theoretical and practical implications of being a Googled ethnographer whose life, work, professional activities and networks as represented online are available for public scrutiny.

The paper argues, taking inspiration from Sarah Pink's recent work, that the author's and others’ use of information and communication technologies implicates us in shared “entanglements” of responsibility within and beyond research sites. The importance of these entanglements for contemporary thinking about researcher positionality, research relationships and researched/researching subjectivities is also considered.

The Criminal Justice Act 1993 (CJA 1993) introduces a wide array of offences designed to combat the threat of money laundering. While not the first piece of legislation with such a purpose, the CJA 1993 is a major bulwark in the United Kingdom's anti‐laundering legislation, creating several offences for what might at first seem barely criminal behaviour. Furthermore, the Money Laundering Regulations of the same year place an onerous burden on financial institutions to put in place systems to combat laundering.

The acquisition of and control over wealth is the motivation for most serious crimes involving premeditation. This is all the more so when the criminal activity resembles an enterprise which inevitably requires capital to operate and lubricate its aspirations. Money, or rather wealth, in its disposable form, is therefore not only the goal of criminal enterprises but the life blood of the enterprise. Therefore until the profits of crime are taken away from subversive and criminal factions, there is little chance of effectively discouraging criminal and abusive conduct which produces great wealth or, through its profits, allows power and prestige to be acquired. As soon as the state devises methods for the tracing and seizure of such funds, there is an obvious and compelling incentive for the criminal to hide the source of his ill‐gotten gains — in other words to engage in money laundering.

In this article attention will focus on the risks to high street solicitors in England and Wales who handle money on behalf of clients which may be the proceeds of criminal activity. There are many difficult issues involved and some of these will be discussed.

Although much has been written about international students in higher education in Australia, there is a paucity of research and discussion about international academics especially non-whites and their lived experience in the workplace. This paper represents the voices of two academics working in metropolitan universities in Melbourne. The purpose of this paper is to raise awareness of how in spite of all the goodwill and highbrow research, the “corridors of academia” need to be examined in considering the politics of inclusion and internationalisation as the authors still need to address issues of colour as they exist in the academy.

The authors use narrative inquiry and reflection to tell the story as both phenomenon and method where the phenomenon is the story and inquiry is the narrative.

The findings suggest student and staff perceptions of difference are mostly theorised but not practiced within the academy.

The paper includes two voices, a limitation in itself, thus generalisations cannot be made to other academics or institutions. The authors recommend more professional development for staff and students alike to embrace issues of colour, culture and difference.

The authors draw attention to the need for academics to reflect on their behaviour within their own academic communities and be more aware of minority groups in academia.

By including and listening to issues facing minority groups (academics and students) can only improve the social cohesion of university worksites.

This is an original work carried out by both authors. It raises concerns that may also be experienced international staff and or students.

In preparing this report, the compliance sub‐group has set out to (a) summarise the current compliance regime as a matter of law and practice, (b) identify particular problem areas within that regime concerning public sector officials (PSOs), and (c) suggest recommendations for change. The result may be seen as providing features of a ‘model’ compliance structure designed to cause difficulties for corrupt PSOs seeking to launder the proceeds of their corruption; UK law and practice has formed the springboard for the model, but it should be stressed that in order to be of any utility any suggested changes would have to be adopted (effectively) universally throughout the financial world. Piecemeal adoption by one or a few states would merely be likely to drive the tainted monies elsewhere, and would not serve the desired purpose of reducing the extent/profitability of corruption.

The Financial Action Task Force (the chief international agency against money laundering) blacklisted Israel (June 2000) as one of the 15 countries that fail to cooperate in the international efforts to combat money laundering. Soon after, the Israeli Parliament enacted the Prohibition on Money Laundering Law, 5760–2000 (the ‘Law’). The Law has far‐reaching legal, economic and policy implications. This paper attempts to sketch the global backdrop against which the Law was adopted, analyse its provisions, expose its implications and draw attention to its pros and cons. It is structured along the following lines: the first section sets out the international campaign against money laundering. The second section describes the pressures exerted by the international community to persuade Israel to join the club of countries that counteract money‐laundering operations. The third and fourth sections analyse the ratio legis of the Law and its provisions, respectively. In the fifth section an account is provided of the problematic aspects of the Law. The last section provides some conclusions that may be drawn at this early stage.