ABSTRACT
Introduction Hegel’s dialectic, consisting of a thesis, an antithesis, and a synthesis, best describes the dynamics among financial and economic criminals, on the one hand, and domestic and international regulators, organizations, and conventions on the other. While regulators are satisfied with enforcing and improving existing laws and regulations constituting the “thesis,” financial and economic criminals develop new modes of crime for the purpose of-simply stated-profits and gains. These new criminal modes and techniques become the “antithesis.” The new laws and regulations developed to face this antithesis form the “synthesis,” which becomes the “new thesis.” This new thesis satisfies regulators that crimes are abated, as the cycle of criminal activities decreases from its previous antithesis peak to a trough. However, the low point of the cycle reaches another peak as the substitution of new modes of crime develops, beginning the process again. Technological developments help both sides, but favour the criminals, as they exploit them to strengthen their antithesis-as has happened with cyberspace crimes and terrorism. The moral of the dialectic is that there will always be financial and economic crime, with regulations lagging behind, simply because profits lead ethics and laws. At best, regulators can increase the slope of the cycle, reducing criminal activities faster and extending the periodicity of the cycle, thus keeping economic and financial crimes at a low level for a longer period. Determining whether this glass is half-empty or half-full depends on whether one is drinking or pouring.
