Robert A Williams - Academia.edu (original) (raw)

Uploads

Thesis (unpublished) by Robert A Williams

Mainstream Acceptance: legal and regulatory reforms that need to take place for virtual currencies to replace fiat money, 2018

This paper intends to contribute to the literature on the future of virtual currencies (VCs) by p... more This paper intends to contribute to the literature on the future of virtual currencies (VCs) by positing that they can potentially replace traditional currency (i.e. banknotes and coin); yet not fully replace the trust-based fiat monetary regime given that only through the trust in and oversight from the government, can VCs achieve the necessary credibility so as to be accepted as a mainstream mechanism of exchange and comply with the functions of money commonly discussed in traditional economic literature, which are that it is (i) a medium of exchange; (ii) a unit of account; (iii) a storer of value; and, (iv) legal tender.

For this to occur, VCs schemes will need to be brought into the fold of existing laws and regulations in order to address all of the associated risks to market participants including the consumer, merchants, payment system providers, regulators, enforcement agencies, and all other payment-network stakeholders that exist in today’s monetary economy.

In order to highlight some of the potential reforms that are needed, this paper looks at how relevant jurisdictions such as the European Union (EU), the United Kingdom (UK), and the United States (US) are addressing the challenges posed by VC schemes, and provide suggestions as it relates to laws and regulation that seek to promote price and financial stability, as well as regulations surrounding consumer protection and anti-money laundering (AML)/countering terrorist financing (CTF).

Papers (unpublished) by Robert A Williams

EU harmonisation and the sovereignty tight rope, 2017

This paper seeks to outline the tightrope that European nations face by being EU Member States, w... more This paper seeks to outline the tightrope that European nations face by being EU Member States, while seeking to quench the thirst for sovereignty.

Immediately after the Second World War (WWII) was a period of enlightenment for the creation of multilateral organisations as humanity sought to cure the divisiveness and nationalist sentiments that had driven the World to such a catastrophic event.

This was a period where the international community was looking for a way to rebuild and come together “so as to reduce, if not eradicate, the possibility of such a conflict recurring on this scale". During this period, steps were taken to create international organisations the likes of the United Nations (UN), the World Bank (WB), the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT - which acted as the de facto World Trade Organisation (WTO) until 1994); all with the underlying rationale of building a platform to permanently promote peace and reconstruct.

The concept of sovereignty is a complex one with many definitions, some of which can even be considered contradictory. Within the context of a nation, sovereignty refers to the independence and the freedom to collectively act as the “supreme public power, which has the right, and, in theory, the capacity to impose its authority in the last instance”. Hence, it can be understood as the “authority of a state to govern itself, and determine its own laws and policies”. But Member States of the EU do not enjoy this freedom of independence to its fullest extent.

It is this loss that has pushed certain nations, from time to time, and now more increasingly, to demand their own governments to reestablish national sovereignty over the EU, with the UK taking the most aggressive stance

A Comparison Between a Developing County and 'Best in Class' AML/CTF Legislative Framework, 2017

This paper seeks to compare best-in-class AML/CTF regimes established in developed countries (US ... more This paper seeks to compare best-in-class AML/CTF regimes established in developed countries (US and UK) versus those in developing countries.

In the second half of the 1980’s, the US came out with its first piece of legislation seeking to criminalise money laundering. Provision 18 U.S.C. §1956 - Laundering of monetary instruments – of the Money Laundering Control Act 1986 (MLCA 1986) outlines three activities, where if engaged, were considered criminal activity within the newly formed concept of money laundering.

Being the ‘brothers in arms’ that they are, it is not surprising to see that in the same year the US enacted the MCLA 1986, the United Kingdom (UK) also enacted its own piece of legislation under the Drug Trafficking Offenses Act 1986 (DTOA 1986), which specifically dealt with the laundering of proceeds obtained from drug trafficking.

Shortly after the US and UK enacted their pieces of legislation that criminalised money laundering, the United Nations Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Phychotropic Substances 1988 (the Convention) criminalised it at an international level. Article 3(1)(b)(i)(ii) of the Convention calls on each Party to “adopt such measures as may be necessary to establish as criminal offence under its domestic law, when committed intentionally”.

In contrast, the AML/CTF regime in many developing countries, such as the Dominican Republic (DR), could be called incipient, with an evolutionary process that is more akin to one that has been forced on them by external pressures instead of being self-imposed. As such developing countries have proven to be followers when it comes to the AML/CTF legislative agenda. It is here where the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) has played a critical role in updating developing country legislation to meet the AML/CTF challenges of the day.

Special and Differential Treatment, 2017

Special and differential treatment (S&D) allows for developing countries to deviate from the core... more Special and differential treatment (S&D) allows for developing countries to deviate from the core principle of most-favoured nation (MFN) treatment obligation that makes up the multilateral agreements of the World Trade Organisation (WTO). The logic behind S&D stems from the "principle that a set of uniform multilateral rights and obligations among a deeply diverse set of nations could not serve the best interests of all parties", especially considering the inherent disadvantages that 'developing', and most notably, 'least-developed' countries (LDC's), have.

Hence, under the premise that equal treatment could not secure equality, unequal treatment was therefore required to correct the inequalities. This has led some to question whether a system based on the unequal treatment of its Members, is in fact, sustainable over time? In response, others have argued that if accommodation of the key issues affecting the divergence of the Members is not managed with its inherent idiosyncrasies and in the common interest, the multilateral character and all of the benefits flowing from a 'universalist' approach would be in jeopardy.

It should therefore come as no surprise that provisions found within the WTO agreements seek to provide S&D treatment and find a solution to issues such as the participation of developing countries in the decision-making process of the WTO.

Most-Favoured Nation Under Siege, 2017

This paper seeks to understand the relationship between World Trade Organization (WTO) rules and ... more This paper seeks to understand the relationship between World Trade Organization (WTO) rules and Regional Trade Agreements (RTA's).

In essence, it is purported that by allowing the formalisation of RTA’s, the WTO recognises the value they bring in trade liberalisation and economic integration. This is likely linked to the belief that trade liberalisation is more quickly achieved through regional trading blocs, and that these RTA’s serve as stepping stones for trade liberalisation at the multilateral level and global scale.

The paper concludes that WTO Members use RTA's to address issues such as (i) internal political and strategic objectives; (ii) allow for faster movement in the direction of economic integration; (iii) use them as insurance policies to secure better market access while avoiding protectionism and exclusion; (iv) send a message to foreign direct investment in the hopes of attracting it; (v) using them as mechanisms for counteracting domestic interest; and, (vi) using them to address other trade policy related measures.

Ultimately, recent evidence seems to suggest that WTO Members use RTA’s as a complex policy instrument, beyond seeking to simply secure tariff preferences given that the aforementioned issues are aspects less profoundly addressed by the multilateral agreements that make up the WTO.

Disruptive Change or Business as Usual?, 2016

This paper looks into British Parliament's decision to codify director's duties by passing the Co... more This paper looks into British Parliament's decision to codify director's duties by passing the Companies Act 2006.

The UK is a common law country, and common law is largely un-codified, which means that judicial decisions are made on the basis of precedent where the authoritative source of law is developed through the principle of stare decisis which has the intention of providing certainty, fairness and consistency to the legal process. Previous decisions are then kept in the records of the court and historically documented in collections called ‘yearbooks and reports’. This method of building on itself seems to be the reason why common law is so effective and able to adapt to the changing needs of society with such ease.

However, while common law has proven to be versatile in its ability to adapt, some critics have argued that the law is difficult to comprehend by the common man, and the trending tied is for an increase in transparency and awareness. So it would seem that while common law has served the UK business community well, through codifying directors’ duties, it was Parliament’s intention to make the law more comprehendible and transparent to the common businessman.