(Where is) the Tipping Point for Governmental Regulation of Canadian Lawyers? Perhaps it is in Paradise: Critically Assessing Regulation of Lawyer Involvement with Money Laundering After Canada (Attorney General) v Federation of Law Societies of Canada
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
their capacity to meet it.This article critically examines the extent to which law societies are positioned to effectively meet that burden, and, relatedly, what implications this may have for the future of lawyer self-regulation in Canada.The article critiques the extent to which law societies have the capacity to combat the use of law practices as shields for money laundering as well as what capacity legal regulators as currently constituted reasonably have to do so in the future.With reference to the 2016 Report of the Intergovernmental body developing and promoting policies to combat money laundering and terrorist financing (FATF), this article raises concerns that the Supreme Court of Canada's judgment in the Federation of Law Societies case rests on a shaky foundation whereby money laundering was unexplored as an issue because it was conceded to be a global problem.It suggests that the current magnitude of money laundering in a globalized economy, as revealed by the Panama Papers and Paradise Papers, among other sources, coupled with the low capacity of law societies to address it renders the global threat of money laundering sufficiently calamitous to the international monetary system for governmental regulation of lawyers, as opposed to continued self-regulation, to be an appropriate course of action justifiable under s. 1 of the Charter.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it