Remedial and Institutional Constructive Trusts

Remedial and Institutional Constructive Trusts Title: The remedial constructive trust has taken root in the United States and Canada: it is unlikely to do so in England Millett LJ in Restitution and Constructive Trusts 1998 114 LQR p399. Explain the differences between remedial and institutional constructive trusts and the advantages and disadvantages of each approach. Discuss whether judges in England and Wales are likely to adopt the remedial system. INTRODUCTION A definition of a trust, reflected in case law, suggests that a person with responsibility for property has an obligation in accordance with principles of equity to exhibit beneficence[1] towards any beneficiaries, any of whom might enforce this obligation[2]. The concept of the constructive trust is not overwhelmingly supported, with Hayton categorising it â€Å"â€Å"a fiction which provides a useful remedy when no remedy is available in contract or in tort†[3]. A constructive trust may be either institutional or remedial, although only institutional constructive trusts are acceptable practice in the UK at the present time. According to Halsbury â€Å"the remedial constructive trust†¦is not in reality a trust at all, but merely a remedial mechanism by which equity gives relief for fraud’[4]. The distinction between constructive trusts raise a number of issues that are of particular relevance when considering whether the law in England and Wales is likely to adopt the remedial system. It must be noted, however, that, whilst the importance of both proprietary estoppel[5] and Pallant v Morgan[6] equity are acknowledged as relevant to a discussion on constructive trusts, their applications are specific. Accordingly, due to constraints on space, their inclusion in this particular essay have been omitted[7]. DISCUSSION Whilst law in other jurisdictions needs to resort to such measures as the remedial system, law in the UK currently relies on the Statutes of Limitation[8], within which remedial constructive trusts may be considered to be related to the Limitation Act 1980[9]. The specific distinction between legal and equitable ownership originated through the historical significance of common law and the law of equity, as established through the Courts of Chancery. It is readily acknowledged that a correlation exists between constructive trusts and the doctrine of equity, with effect from the date in which circumstances dictated a need for such intervention, a factor noted in Westdeutsche Bank[10] by Browne-Wilkinson, LJ who observed that â€Å"A remedial constructive trust†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦is a judicial remedy giving rise to an enforceable equitable obligation†¦Ã¢â‚¬ [11] Institutional Constructive Trust There have been a number of significant cases heard, where the courts have ruled that institutional constructive trusts will prevail[12]. An institutional constructive trust might be invoked in such cases as domestic disputes involving property, breaches within a fiduciary relationship, contracts relating to sales of land, and certain situations relating to commercial insolvency. Case law established ‘in law and in equity that land could be the subject of ownership’[13], with a further recognition that ‘the person owning either type of estate has a right of property’ according to Lord Browne-Wilkinson[14], established through statute in the Law of Property Act 1925. Freehold land, or land held in fee simple, relates to land held in trust to the Crown, with the owners being beneficiaries, or trustees, or land that is held in cestuis que trust which is revealed as an equitable estate. The requirement for a formal record of equitable entitlement to the transfer of land in accordance with the Law of Property Act 1925 53 (2)[15] reveals a situation inconsistent with the ethos of remedial trusts. Shares in property can be transferred from the owner of a property to bestow the gift of beneficial ownership on another person through the conveyancing procedure of legal transfer by deed according to the Law of Property Act 1925, section 52 (1). Conversely, where full consideration has not been paid when land is transferred an inference of fact would result, as clarified in Subsection 60(3) of the Law of Property Act 1925. Remedial Constructive Trusts Pascoe[16] notes an apparent lack of consensus as to whether remedial constructive trusts are based on an enforcement of proprietary rights or to avoid unconscionable conduct, but suggests it ‘is imposed by equity regardless of actual or presumed agreement or intention’[17] in order for the courts to implement a measure of restitution[18]. Certain situations require a remedy within the law that is particularly suitable for a specific set of circumstances. This is determined at the discretion of the court and is realised in the imposition of a remedial constructive trust, characterised by the particular facet that no trust existed prior to the intervention of the court. An interesting development in the definition attached to constructive trusts was suggested in Barnes v Addy[19] in which Lord Selborne, LC introduced the distinction between a duty owed by directors and duty owed by ‘non-fiduciary strangers’, referring to this concept as ‘the two limbs o f Barnes v Addy’. More recently this referent has been recognised as ‘recipient liability’[20] and ‘accessory liability’[21]. Various jurisdictions around the world acknowledge a distinct emphasis between institutional constructive trusts and remedial constructive trusts, based on the common law precepts of unjust enrichment. The constructive trust would then be recognised as a means of restitution[22], a remedy available for the courts to resort to when other methods of restitution are inappropriate. Often considered synonymous with remedial constructive trusts is the case of Polly Peck International plc (in admin) (No 2)[23]. Referring to additional rights of restitution that might be accorded the plaintiff in respect of legitimate rights to property the Court of Appeal in England made reference to the decision in the Supreme Court in Canada[24]. Different Jurisdictions Amongst the different jurisdictions who habitually utilise the remedial approach, Australia[25] generally adheres to a traditional approach characterised by a link between claimant and the property at dispute, whilst acknowledging the distinction between recipient and accessory[26] liabilities. Accordingly, remedies might be applied ‘in personam’ rather than ‘in rem’. According to Fardell and Fulton[27], the constructive trust has become an important remedy within the courts in New Zealand, fully utilising the concept of remedial constructive trusts in any situation in which a defendant might have prejudiced a plaintiff’s claim to equity as a matter of principle[28]. This particular application of the remedial system has been criticised by the judiciary in Australia as they perceive it represents â€Å"a medium for the indulgence of idiosyncratic notions of justice and fairness†[29]. However, at the New Zealand Court of Appeal Tipping, J concur red with the Australian opinion, although using different reasoning[30]. There have, however, been instances whereby a more controversial approach has been taken, often utilised in the US[31] although, on occasion, in other jurisdictions such as New Zealand in the case of Re Liggett[32] based, as it was, on the decision in the US case of Chase Manhattan Bank. Since then, however, both the Privy Council[33] and the House of Lords[34] have overruled that decision[35]. The law relating to constructive trusts has recently changed in Canada following the Supreme Court’s ruling in the cases of Soulos v. Korkontzilas[36]. Prior to this, such cases as Pettkus v Bekker[37], Sorochan v Sorochan[38] and Rosenfeldt v Olson[39] were the definitive referents in relation to remedies imposed by the courts to prevent the perpetuation of injustices within the specific categories associated with benefiting through unjust enrichment[40]. The Supreme Court focused on the ethos of ‘good conscience’ in their decision when ruling on Soulos v. Korkontzilas[41] . They decided that constructive trusts needed to be imposed to maintain certain standards[42], with four conditions introduced, each of which must present if a constructive trust was to be implemented[43]. Subsequently, these conditions have been applied to all cases relating to constructive trusts heard in Canada’s Supreme Court. CONCLUSION It has been suggested that every resulting trust is realised through the transfer of property in a situation where benefit to the recipient was not the intended option, the consequence of which is a presumption of resulting trust. This significance is recognised in the doctrine of equity in terms of recognition of the terms of endowment. In the UK it is in this particular situation that the inherent importance between constructive and resulting trusts lie. Furthermore, it is this particular situation in which other jurisdictions more often introduce the doctrine of remedial trusts. It appears to be accepted by the majority of commentators that, for a resulting trust to be formed, actual assets must be present in terms of identifiable property, the remedy of which may be found in common law. Despite Millett LJ being of the opinion that the remedial approach is unlikely to take root in England[44], it has been acknowledged in the Court of Appeal[45], the Privy Council[46] and in the House of Lords[47], in obiter dicta, that a possibility might exist for the future incorporation of remedial constructive trusts into UK legislation. This controversy has, by no means been resolved and, at some point will undoubtedly become incorporated into UK legislation, either in its present format, or modified to enable â€Å"†¦an aggrieved party to obtain restitution†[48] through the correlation that exists between constructive trusts and the doctrine of equity which is represented through the concept of morality and obligations, with â€Å"the benefit of an obligation [being] so treated that it has come to look rather like a true proprietary right†[49]. Total Word Count [excluding footnotes and bibliography]: 1,496 words BIBLIOGRAPHY BOOKS: Cope, M (1992): Constructive Trusts. Sweet and Maxwell Maitland, F W (1936): Equity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Page 115 Underhill and Hayton (1995): Law of Trusts and Trustees [15th ed]. London: Butterworth: Page 1 Wilkie, Margaret; Luxton, Peter; and Malcolm, Rosalind (1998): Blackstone’s Land Law. London: Blackstone Press, Page 111 HALSBURY’S LAWS Available Online from: Butterworth’s Direct Search facilities. Access via Athens Gateway: http://www.butterworths.com/butterworths.asp Vol 16 (2000 Reissue) Para 1072 Vol 48 (2000 Reissue) Paras 401 – 403: former Court of Chancery Vol 48 (2000 Reissue) Para 501. Vol 48 (2000 Reissue) Para 592 ARTICLES: Austin, RP (1988): The Melting Down of the Remedial Trust. 11 NSWLJ 66. Available from: Pascoe, Janine: Remedial Constructive Trusts and Corporate Insolvency: an Australian Perspective. Department of Business Law Taxation, Monash University, Australia. Available from: http://www.lbc.com.au/academic/ccl-ezine/pdf/vol8issue1_RemedialTrusts.pdf [Accessed 24th July 2005] Bryan, M (1995): Cleaning up after Breaches of Fiduciary Duty – the Liability of Banks and other Financial Institutions as Constructive Trustees. In 7 Bond Law Review 67. Available in: Pascoe, Janine: Remedial Constructive Trusts and Corporate Insolvency: an Australian Perspective. Department of Business Law Taxation, Monash University, Australia. Available from: http://www.lbc.com.au/academic/ccl-ezine/pdf/vol8issue1_RemedialTrusts.pdf [Accessed 24th July 2005] Dodds, J (1988): The New Constructive Trust: An Analysis of its Nature and Scope. 16 MULR 482. In Pascoe, Janine: Remedial Constructive Trusts and Corporate Insolvency: an Australian Perspective. Department of Business Law Taxation, Monash University, Australia. Available from: http://www.lbc.com.au/academic/ccl-ezine/pdf/vol8issue1_RemedialTrusts.pdf [Accessed 24th July 2005] Fardell, R and Fulton, K (1991): Constructive Trusts-A New Era. NZJL: 90. In Pascoe, Janine: Remedial Constructive Trusts and Corporate Insolvency: an Australian Perspective. Department of Business Law Taxation, Monash University, Australia. Available from: http://www.lbc.com.au/academic/ccl-ezine/pdf/vol8issue1_RemedialTrusts.pdf [Accessed 24th July 2005] Hayton, DJ (1985): Personal Accountability of Strangers as Constructive Trustees. 27 Malaya LR 313,314: Singapore Journal of Legal Studies. Access via ATHENS Gateway McKendrick, E (1994): Unascertained Goods: Ownership and Obligation Distinguished. 110 LQR 509 513 Millett LJ (1998): Restitution and Constructive Trusts 114 LQR p. 399 O’Connor, P (1996): Happy Partners or Strange Bedfellows: the Blending of Remedial and Institutional Features in the Evolving Constructive Trust 30 MULR 735. In Pascoe, Janine: Remedial Constructive Trusts and Corporate Insolvency: an Australian Perspective. Department of Business Law Taxation, Monash University, Australia. Available from: http://www.lbc.com.au/academic/ccl-ezine/pdf/vol8issue1_RemedialTrusts.pdf [Accessed 24th July 2005] ONLINE RESOURCES Pascoe, Janine: Remedial Constructive Trusts and Corporate Insolvency: an Australian Perspective. Department of Business Law Taxation, Monash University, Australia. Available from: http://www.lbc.com.au/academic/ccl-ezine/pdf/vol8issue1_RemedialTrusts.pdf [Accessed 24th July 2005] TABLE OF CASES: Baden Delvaux and Lecuit v Societe Generale [1993] 1 WLR at 509, 575 Bannister v Bannister [1948] 2 All ER 133 Banner Homes Group plc v Luff Developments Ltd [2000] Ch 372, CA Barnes v Addy (1874) LR 9 Ch App 244 Beatty v Guggenheim Exploration Co 225 NY 380 at 386 [1919] Chase Manhattan Bank NA v Israel British Bank (London) Ltd [1981] Ch 105 Cia de Seguros Imperio (a body corporate) v Heath (REBX) Ltd (formerly CE Heath Co (North America) Ltd) [2000] 2 All ER (Comm) 787; [2001] 1 WLR 112, CA Daly v The Sydney Stock Exchange Ltd (1986) 160 CLR 371 Fortex Group Ltd (In Rec and Liq) v MacIntoshes [1994] 3 WLR 199; [1998] 3 NZLR 171. Hussey v Palmer [1972] 3 All ER 70 (CA) Linter Group Ltd v Goldberg (1986) 160 CLR 371 Mabo v Queensland (No 2) [1992] 175 CLR 1, High Court of Australia Metall und Rohstoff AG v Donaldson Lufkin Jenrette Inc [1990] 1 QB 391 and [1989] 3 All ER 14 CA Muschinki v Dodds (1985) 160 CLR 583 at 614 Pallant v Morgan [1953] Ch 43, and [1952] 2 All ER 951 Paragon Finance plc v DB Thakerar Co (a firm) [1999] 1 All ER 400, CA Pettkus v Bekker [1980] 19 RFL (2d) 165 Polly Peck International plc (in admin) (No 2) [1998] 3 All ER 812 at 825-826 Re Goldcorp Exchange Ltd Re Goldcorp Exchange Ltd (in receivership) [1995] 1 AC 74; [1994] 3 WLR 199 and [1994] 2 All ER 606 PC Re Liggett v Kingston [1993] 1 NZLR 257 Re Polly Peck International plc (in administration) (No 2) [1998] 3 All ER 812, and [1998] 2 BCLC 185, CA Re Sharpe [1980] 1 WLR 219 Rosenfeldt v Olson 1 BCLR (2d) 108, [1986] 3 WWR 403, 25 DLR (4th) 472 (CA). Sorochan v Sorochan [1986] 2 SCR 39 Soulos v Korkontzilas [1997] S.C.J. No. 52 Taylor v Davies [1920] AC 636, PC Tinsley v Milligan [1993] 3 WLR 126; [ 1994] 1 A.C. 340, 371 Westdeutsche Landesbank Girozentrale v. Islington London BC [ 1994] 4 All E.R. 890, 962, CA.; varied [ 1996] 2 All E.R. 961, HL; [ 1996] 2 All E.R. 961, 990, H.L; [1996] AC 669 at 714-415 1 Footnotes [1] See Beatty v Guggenheim Exploration Co 225 NY 380 at 386 [1919] [2] This definition is paraphrased from Halsbury’s Laws, Vol. 48 (2000 Reissue) at para 501 who have based this definition on Underhill and Hayton ( ): Law of Trusts and Trustees [15th ed]: Page 1 [3] Hayton, DJ (1985) 27 Mal LR 313,314 [4] Halsbury’s Law, Vol 48 (2000 Reissue) Para 501 [5] Halsbury’s Laws, Vol 16 (Reissue) Para 1072 and Vol 48 at 592 [6] Pallant v Morgan [1953] Ch 43, and [1952] 2 All ER 951. Halsbury’s Laws, Vol 48 at 593 [7] Banner Homes Group plc v Luff Developments Ltd [2000] Ch 372, CA per Chadwick LJ: this case introduced the term Pallant v Morgan equity [8] In accordance with the former Court of Chancery, Halsbury’s Laws, Vol 48, Paras 401 – 403 ante [9] Halsbury’s Laws, Vol 48 (2000 Reissue) Para 501 cites a number of cases relating to this point: Halsbury quotes Taylor v Davies [1920] AC 636, PC; Paragon Finance plc v DB Thakerar Co (a firm) [1999] 1 All ER 400, CA; Cia de Seguros Imperio (a body corporate) v Heath (REBX) Ltd (formerly CE Heath Co (North America) Ltd) [2000] 2 All ER (Comm) 787, and [2001] 1 WLR 112, CA [10] Westdeutsche Bank Landesbank Gironsentrale v Islington London BC [1996] AC 669 at 714-415 per Lord Browne-Wilkinson [11] â€Å"Under an institutional constructive trust, the trust arises by operation of law as from the date of the circumstances which gave rise to it: the function of the court is to declare that such a trust has arisen in the past. The consequences that arise from such a trust having arisen (including the possibly unfair consequences to third parties who, in the interim, have received the trust property) are also determined by rules of law, not under discretion. A remedial constructive trust, as I understand it, is different. It is a judicial remedy giving rise to an enforceable equitable obligation: the extent to which it operates retrospectively to the prejudice of third parties lies in the discretion of the court†. Ibid, Note 9 [12] Bannister v Bannister [1948] 2 All ER 133, Re Sharpe [1980] 1 WLR 219 and Beatty v Guggenheim Exploration Co 225 NY 380 at 386 [1919] [13] Mabo v Queensland (No 2) [1992] per Deane and Gaudron JJ [14] Tinsley v Milligan (1994): â€Å"English law has one single law of property made up of legal and equitable interests† per Lord Browne-Wilkinson [15] Wilkie, Margaret; Luxton, Peter; and Malcolm, Rosalind (1998): Blackstone’s Land Law. London: Blackstone Press, Page 111 [16] Pascoe, Janine ( ): Remedial Constructive Trusts and Corporate Insolvency: An Australian Perspective. Senior Law Lecturer, Department of Business Law Taxation, Monash University, Australia. [17] Muschinki v Dodds (1985) 160 CLR 583 at 614 per Deane J. Also Cope, M (1992): Constructive Trusts [18] Pascoe quotes a number of references from Australian literature: O’Connor, P (1996): Happy Partners or Strange Bedfellows: the Blending of Remedial and Institutional Features in the Evolving Constructive Trust. 30 MULR 735; Also Bryan, M (1995): Cleaning up after Breaches of Fiduciary Duty – the Liability of Banks and other Financial Institutions as Constructive Trustees. 7 Bond Law Review 67; Also Austin, RP (1988): The Melting Down of the Remedial Trust. 11 NSWLJ 66; Also Dodds, J (1988): The New Constructive Trust: An Analysis of its Nature and Scope. 16 MULR 482. [19] Barnes v Addy (1874) LR 9 Ch App 244 [20] See Baden Delvaux and Lecuit v Societe Generale [1993] 1 WLR per Gibson, J at 509; 575 [21] Known as constructive trustees. This relates to a personal liability to an accessory to fraud [22] McKendrick, E (1994): Unascertained Goods: Ownership and Obligation Distinguished 110 LQR 509 [23] Polly Peck International plc (in admin) (No 2) [1998] 3 All ER 812 at 825-826 [24] See Soulos v Korkontzilas [1997] S.C.J. No. 52 [25] Pacoe, Janine: Remedial Constructive Trusts and Corporate Insolvency: an Australian Perspective. Department of Business Law Taxation, Monash University, Australia [26] LinterGroup Ltd v Goldberg (1986) 160 CLR 371: Constructive trustee was Linter Group as plaintiff. Goldberg Furst were directors of Arnsberg Pty Ltd who breached fiduciary duty. Southwell, J granted Linter Group priority over other creditors in terms of equitable claims and Daly v The Sydney Stock Exchange Ltd (1986) 160 CLR 371: this claim was rejected [27] Fardell, R and Fulton, K (1991): Constructive Trusts-A New Era. NZJL: 90 [28] See Fortex Group Ltd (In Rec and Liq) v MacIntoshes [1998] 3 NZLR 171. See also: Re Goldcorp Exchange Ltd [1994] 3 WLR 199 as it represents opposing characteristics [29] Muschinski v Dodds (1985) 160 CLR 583 per Deane J [30] â€Å"the plaintiffs must be able to point to something which can be said to make it unconscionable—contrary to good conscience—for the secured creditors to rely on their rights a law†Fortex Group Ltd (in rec liq) v MacIntosh [1994] 3 WLR 199 per Tipping, J [31] Chase Manhattan Bank NA v Israel British Bank (London) Ltd [1981] Ch 105 [32] Re Liggett v Kingston [1993] 1 NZLR 257 [33] Re Goldcorp Exchange Ltd [1994] 3 WLR 199 [34] Westdeutsche Landesbank Girocentrale v Islington Borough Council [1996] AC 669 [35] Constraints of space preclude a more detailed investigation of any of the cases [36] Soulos v. Korkontzilas [1997] S.C.J. No. 52 [37] [1980] 19 RFL (2d) 165 [38] [1986] 2 SCR 39 [39] 1 BCLR (2d) 108, [1986] 3 WWR 403, 25 DLR (4th) 472 (CA). [40] â€Å"absence of any juristic reason† [41] Soulos v. Korkontzilas [1997] S.C.J. No. 52 [42] â€Å"†¦a constructive trust may be imposed where good conscience so requires. I conclude that in Canada, under the broad umbrella of good conscience, constructive trusts are recognized both for wrongful acts like fraud and breach of duty of loyalty, as well as to remedy unjust enrichment and corresponding deprivation†: Soulos v. Korkontzilas [1997] S.C.J. No. 52, per Justice McLaughlin [43] Breach of an equitable obligation; assets still with defendant; plaintiff to present legitimate reason for recourse to courts; no third parties who might be unjustly penalised through a constructive trust [44] Millett LJ in Restitution and Constructive Trusts 1998 114 LQR p. 399 [45] Metall und Rohstoff AG v Donaldson Lufkin Jenrette Inc [1990] 1 QB 391 and [1989] 3 All ER 14 CA; Also Re Polly Peck International plc (in administration) (No 2) [1998] 3 All ER 812, and [1998] 2 BCLC 185, CA [46] Re Goldcorp Exchange Ltd (in receivership) [1995] 1 AC 74 and [1994] 2 All ER 606 PC [47] Westdeutsche Landesbank Gironzentrale v Islington London Borough Council [1996] AC 669, and [1996] 2 All ER 961, HL [48] Hussey v Palmer [1972] 3 All ER 70 (CA) per Lord Denning [49] Maitland, F W (1936): Equity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Page 115

Qatar

Known as the State of Qatar or locally Dawlat Qa?ar, is an Arab emirate, in the Middle East, occupying the small Qatar Peninsula on the northeasterly coast of the much larger Arabian Peninsula. Its sole land border is with Saudi Arabia to the south, with the rest of its territory surrounded by the Persian Gulf. A strait of the Gulf separates Qatar from the nearby island state of Bahrain. Qatar has been ruled as an absolute monarchy by the al-Thani family since the mid-19th century. Formerly a British protectorate noted mainly for pearling, it became independent in 1971, and has become one of the region's wealthiest states due to its enormous oil and natural gas revenues. In 1995, Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani became Emir when he seized power from his father, Khalifa bin Hamad Al Thani, in a peaceful coup d'etat. [7] The most important positions in Qatar are held by the members of the al-Thani family, or close confidants of the al- Thani family. Beginning in 1992, Qatar has built intimate military ties with the United States, and is now the location of U. S. Central Command’s Forward Headquarters and the Combined Air Operations Center. Qatar has the world's largest per capita production and proven reserves of both oil and natural gas. In 2010, Qatar had the world's highest GDP per capita, while the economy grew by 19. 40%, the fastest in the world. The main drivers for this rapid growth are attributed to ongoing increases in production and exports of liquefied natural gas, oil, petrochemicals and related industries. Qatar has the highest human development in the Arab World after the United Arab Emirates. In 2009, Qatar was the United States’ fifth largest export market in the Middle East, trailing behind the U. A. E. , Israel, Saudi Arabia and Egypt. With a small citizen population of less than 300,000 people, Qatar relies heavily on foreign citizens, both for its protection and generating labor demand. Qatar has attracted an estimated $100 billion in investment, with approximately $60–70 billion coming from the U. S in the energy sector. It is estimated that Qatar will invest over $120 billion in the energy sector in the next ten years

Island of the Sequined Love Nun Chapter 56~57

56 Escape Kimi was trying to call up thunder and was having no luck at all. He'd been chanting and waving his arms for half an hour and there still wasn't a cloud in the sky. â€Å"You're not holding your arms right,† Sarapul said. He was lying under a palm tree, chewing a betel nut and offering constructive criticism to the navigator. Sepie lay nearby watching. â€Å"I am too,† Kimi said. â€Å"I'm holding them the same way you do.† â€Å"Maybe it doesn't work for Filipinos.† â€Å"It's because I'm shot,† Kimi said. â€Å"If I wasn't shot, I could do this.† Sarapul scanned the horizon. Not even a bird. â€Å"That's it. It's because you're shot.† He spit out a red stream of betel nut juice. â€Å"And you're not holding your arms right.† Kimi resumed chanting and waving his arms. â€Å"Hey!† Sarapul said. â€Å"What? Did you hear thunder? I knew I could do it.† â€Å"No. Be quiet. Someone is calling you.† Kimi listened. Someone was calling him, and they were getting closer. He limped down the beach toward the voice and saw Tucker Case coming around the island. â€Å"Hey, boss, what you doin' out here during the day? The Sorcerer gonna be plenty mad at you.† Tuck was out of breath. â€Å"He is mad. I need your boat, Kimi. And I need you to navigate for me.† â€Å"Not his ship,† Sarapul said. â€Å"My ship.† â€Å"The doc is going to kill me if I don't get off the island. Can I use your boat?† The old cannibal was silent for a moment, thinking. â€Å"Where you go?† â€Å"I don't know. Guam, Yap, anywhere.† â€Å"Can I come?† â€Å"Yes, yes, if I can use your boat.† â€Å"Okay, we leave five days. Right, Kimi?† Kimi looked at Tuck. â€Å"It not be good sailing for five days.† â€Å"I have to go now, Kimi.† â€Å"Can Sepie come?† Sepie stepped back, surprised. â€Å"You want to take me? Women don't sail.† â€Å"You come,† Kimi said. â€Å"Okay, boss?† he said to Tuck. Tuck nodded. â€Å"Whatever. Sepie, go tell Malink that I need everyone to bring drinking coconuts. Many drinking coconuts with the husks taken off. Bananas, mangoes, papaya, and dried fish if he has any.† â€Å"There is plenty shark meat,† Sepie said. â€Å"I need it now, Sepie. Go. Tell Malink that Vincent demands it.† Sarapul began to chop at the underbrush in front of the sailing canoe to clear a path to the water. â€Å"Put down palm leaf to slide ship on,† he told Tuck. Tuck began to gather long palm fronds and lay them down in a path to the water. â€Å"Kimi, can you go get the things from my pack? There's things we can use.† â€Å"What about Roberto?† â€Å"Call for him, but go get the stuff. The money too.† â€Å"Okay, boss.† Ten minutes later Tuck looked up to see Malink leading a line of Shark People through the jungle. All were carrying baskets of food and husked green coconuts. â€Å"You are leaving?† â€Å"Yes, I have to go, Chief.† â€Å"You are taking our ship and our navigator.† â€Å"And our mispel,† Abo added from behind Malink. â€Å"I have to go, Malink. The Sorcerer and the Sky Priestess are going to kill me.† â€Å"But Vincent send you. How they hurt you?† â€Å"They don't really believe in Vincent. They use him to get you to give up the chosen, Malink. They're going to start killing off your people too.† â€Å"They no kill the Chosen. Chosen are for Vincent.† â€Å"No. I told you before. They take out your organs and sell them to be put inside of other people.† Malink scoffed. â€Å"You can no put one man kidney in other man.† â€Å"It was in People magazine. Didn't you see it? Demi Moore, Melanie Griffith, Mariel Hemingway, all of them? You didn't read about it?† Recognition lit up Malink's face. â€Å"Boob job!† â€Å"Yes,† Tuck said. â€Å"Where do you think they get those boobs?† â€Å"Oh, no.† â€Å"Yes.† â€Å"He speaks the truth,† Malink said to the islanders. â€Å"It was in People. Put the food in the boat.† He took Tuck aside. â€Å"You will come back?† â€Å"I'll try.† â€Å"And bring our navigator.† â€Å"I'll try, Malink. I really will.† â€Å"You try.† â€Å"Tide,† Kimi called. â€Å"We go now.† The center of the canoe was filled with coconuts, fruit, and bundles of dried shark meat wrapped in banana leaves. Kimi directed the men to get on either side of the canoe and push it over the mat of palm fronds to the water. When it was afloat, Tuck lifted Sepie in, then climbed in himself. Kimi, standing on the outrigger platform, started to hoist the sail. It was the shape of a tortilla chip stood on end with a bite taken out at the top. Tuck recognized the pieces of his pack sewn into the nylon patchwork. â€Å"Where is Sarapul?† Kimi said. â€Å"Here!† The old cannibal was running out of the jungle, seeming stronger now than Tuck had ever seen him. He had gone back for his spear, a long shaft of mahogany with a wickedly barbed metal tip. Tuck caught the old man by the forearm and pulled him out of the surf and into the canoe. The canoe was already fifty yards from the shore. Sarapul took the long oar at the rear and steered it toward the channel as Kimi stood on the outrigger platform and manipulated the sail. The Shark People stood on the beach looking stunned. A few waved. Malink looked forlorn, Abo heartbroken. â€Å"Thanks,† Tuck shouted over the wave. â€Å"Thank you, Malink.† â€Å"You will come back.† Malink said. It was not a question. Tuck turned to look out to sea, then looked back to see the Shark People wading into the water after them. Behind them he saw a dark figure come out of the jungle. There was no warning shot or demand to halt. Stripe came out onto the beach and opened up with the Uzi. Tuck pushed Sepie's head down under the edge of the gunwale just as a line of bullets stitched and splintered the wood. Kimi screamed and Tuck looked up to see a row of red geysers open in his back. He clung to one of the lines for a second, then fell into the sea. Another scream, this one from Sarapul, the hideous screech of a raging lynx, and the old man went over the side. The gunfire stopped and Tuck risked popping his head up to look back to the beach. Stripe was slamming a new clip into the Uzi as he waded after the canoe. The Shark People had fled from the water and disappeared into the jungle or were cowering on the beach, unable to move. With the sail loose, the canoe had swung around and was being carried by the tide toward the reef. They would miss the channel by only a few feet, but they would miss it and run aground on the reef. Tuck reached up to grab the steering oar just as Stripe let off another burst from the Uzi. At a hundred yards he was spraying a wide pattern, but Tuck heard a couple of bullets thunk into the side of the canoe. The normally crystal water near the shore was clouded with the sand and silt thrown up by the Shark People's retreat, so Stripe did not see the dark shape moving through the water toward him. He wanted a shot. He set the Uzi to semiautomatic and unfolded the stock to take careful aim. Tuck was standing now, leaning hard on the steering oar to bring the canoe around and through the channel. The outrigger scraped over the reef as the canoe approached broadside. Stripe lined up the sights between Tuck's shoulder blades, held his breath, let it out, then squeezed the trigger. Sarapul came out of the water like an angry marlin, spear-first. The metal point entered just under Stripe's chin and exited his skull at the crown, dragging brain and bone on its evil barb. As Stripe fell back, he emptied the clip into the sky. The canoe slipped through the channel into the open ocean. Out on the horizon, a small cloud appeared and dropped a mercurial lightning bolt into the sea, followed a few seconds later by Kimi's thunder. 57 West with the Bat The Sorcerer stood on the beach over the supine body of Yamata. The spear was still sticking out of the guard's skull like a gruesome note spindle waiting for a canceled receipt from the Reaper. â€Å"How did this happen?† the Sorcerer asked. Malink looked at his feet. The Sorcerer seemed more surprised than angry. A day had passed since Sarapul had killed Stripe, and Malink had waited in fear for the time when the Sorcerer would come looking for him. The other guards had torn the village apart looking for Tuck, and Malink had confessed that the pilot had left the island in an old canoe, but he had claimed ignorance of the whereabouts of the guard. Sarapul had been right. They should have pushed the body out to the edge of the reef for the sharks to eat. Actually, that had been Sarapul's second suggestion for the disposal of the body. â€Å"It look like accident,† Malink said. â€Å"Maybe he running and fall on his spear.† â€Å"I want the man who did this, Malink,† the Sorcerer said. â€Å"He is dead.† â€Å"The Filipino did this?† Malink nodded. The other guards had found Kimi's body in the village, where the Shark People had been preparing it for burial. â€Å"I don't think so. The Filipino took four bullets in the back. Whoever did this was very strong. Now you must tell me the truth or Vincent will be angry.† Malink was not afraid of Vincent's wrath. He only now realized that all the wrath his people had ever felt from Vincent had come by way of the Sorcerer and the Sky Priestess. He was afraid of the Sky Priestess. â€Å"The American do this before he leave in the canoe. The guard shoot the girl-man and the American kill the guard.† â€Å"Why didn't you tell me about this before?† â€Å"I am afraid Vincent will be angry.† â€Å"Where did they get a canoe? None of the Shark People know how to build a canoe.† â€Å"It was the girl-man. He know how. He build with Sarapul.† The Sorcerer balled his fists. â€Å"And Sarapul is gone too.† Malink nodded. â€Å"He sail away.† â€Å"Do you know where they were going?† Malink shook his head. â€Å"No. Sarapul is banished. We no talk with him.† â€Å"Where's the guard's weapon?† Malink shrugged. The Sorcerer turned his back and began walking up the beach. â€Å"Have your people bury this man, Malink. Don't let the other guards see him. And be ready. The Sky Priestess will visit you soon.† Sarapul crawled out from some nearby ferns and stood at Malink's side, watching the Sorcerer walk away. â€Å"We should have eaten this guy,† he said, kicking Yamata's body. â€Å"This is very bad,† Malink said. â€Å"He killed my friend.† Sarapul kicked the body again. â€Å"The Sky Priestess will be very angry.† Malink was, once again, feeling the weight of his position. The old cannibal shrugged. â€Å"Can I have my spear back?† Tuck knew that there was a way to use the hands of a watch in conjunction with the movement of the sun to determine direction, but since he wore a digital watch, it wouldn't have done him any good even if he knew the method, which he didn't. He guessed that Guam lay to the west, so he steered for the setting sun, spent the night guessing, and corrected his course to put the sun behind them at sunrise. He did know how to sail. It was required knowledge for a kid growing up in a wealthy family near San Diego, but celestial navigation was a complete mystery. Sepie was no help at all. Even if she knew anything, she hadn't said a word since Kimi had been shot. Tuck forced her to drink the water from a couple of green coconuts, but other than that, she had lain in the bow motionless for twenty-four hours. He was now looking at his second sunset at sea. He corrected his course and realized that they must have been traveling north most of the day. How far, he couldn't guess. He steered southwest until the sun lay on the water like a glowing platter, hoping to correct some of the damage. He really wished that Sepie would come around. He needed some sleep, and he needed some relief from his own thoughts. Thoughts of the Sky Priestess, of the Sorcerer, and of his dead friend Kimi. Despite the navigat-or's surly manner, he had been a good kid. Tuck, who had been brought up in relative luxury, couldn't imagine having endured the life that Kimi had lived. And the navigator had never given up. He had lived and died with courage. And he would still be alive if he hadn't met Tucker Case. â€Å"Fuck!† Tuck said to no one. He wiped his eyes on his sleeve and squinted at the gunmetal waves. There was a flapping noise up by the mast and Tuck adjusted the steering oar to catch the wind. The sail filled again, but the flapping continued for a second before it stopped. Roberto caught the shroud line that was secured to the outrigger and did an upside-down swinging landing that left him looking to the back of the canoe. Tuck couldn't have been happier if it had been an angel hanging from his shroud line. â€Å"Roberto?† â€Å"Yes,† the bat said. He was speaking in his own voice, not Vincent's. The accent Filipino, not Manhattan. Tuck almost burst out laughing. His mood swings were so rapid and wide now that he was afraid his sanity might be falling through the chasm. â€Å"I didn't recognize you without your glasses.† â€Å"I no like the light,† Roberto said. Tuck looked to Sepie, still lying in the bow. â€Å"Look, Sepie, it's Roberto.† The girl did not stir. â€Å"You are very sad about Kimi,† Roberto said. â€Å"Yes,† Tuck said, â€Å"I am sad.† â€Å"He tell you he was great navigator and you no believe him.† Tuck looked away. Something about bats increases shame by a factor of ten. â€Å"You are going the wrong way,† the bat said. â€Å"Go that way.† He pointed with a wing claw. The wind caught his wing and nearly spun him off the shroud line. He braced himself with the other wing claw and pointed again. â€Å"I mean that way.† â€Å"You're shitting me,† Tuck said. â€Å"That way.† â€Å"That's north. I'm going to Guam. West.† â€Å"That's west. I am born on Guam.† â€Å"You're a bat.† â€Å"You ever see a lost bat?† â€Å"No, but I've never seen a talking bat either.† â€Å"See?† Roberto said, as if he had made his point. â€Å"That way.† After all the evidence is in – after you've run all the facts by everything you know – and you're still lost, you have to do some things on faith. Tuck steered in the direction Roberto was pointing. A few minutes later he looked up to see Vincent sitting on the pile of coconuts in the center of the canoe. â€Å"Good call, listening to the bat,† Vincent said. â€Å"I just wanted you to know that the Shark People are going to build some ladders.† â€Å"Well, that's a useful bit of information,† Tuck said. â€Å"It will be,† Vincent said. Then he disappeared.

Campaign Finance Reform Essay - 3020 Words

Introduction Each year billions of dollars are spent on getting candidates of various offices of government elected. Many candidates have had tremendous success through the efforts of much needed monetary contributions to their campaign. Contributors range from unions, religious leaders, organizations such as Mothers Against Drunk Drivers (MADD), the National Rifle Association (NRA), and senior citizens groups. When these groups, known as special interest groups, donate to candidate’s campaign, they expect the candidate to respond to their issues. Because special interest groups, as well as private citizens donate more and more money to campaigns, there is some concern that there is a great need for campaign finance reform. The total†¦show more content†¦Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) When Senators Russ Feingold and Senator McCain introduced the first version of the BCRA on September 7, 1995, soft money was still in the reform. â€Å"Soft money contributions, which were unregulated donations made to a political party, were not allowed under the law to influence individual candidates or campaigns. But in practice, soft money given to political parties was funneled to individual campaigns, or used to run phony issue ads that were actually advertisements for a candidate. As the parties collected more and more soft money, it became impossible to ignore at least the perception that large contributors, corporations, and labor unions were buying access to politicians. In the 1992 election cycle, the parties raised a total of $86 million in soft money. In 1996, that number more than tripled to $262 million. And in 2000, soft money receipts nearly doubled again to $495 million, nearly half a billion dollars. It was the equivalent of hanging a For Sale sign on our nations capital (Feingold, 2004, p. 1). The McCain-Feingold-Shays-Meehan act bans these soft money contributions. On March 27, 2002, President Bush signed into law the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (BCRA), Public Law No. 107-155. The BCRA contains changes to the federal campaign finance law, to include: †¢ A prohibition on Soft Money -- i.e., solicitation and use of nonfederal funds byShow MoreRelatedCampaign Finance Reform Essay454 Words   |  2 PagesCampaign Finance Reform Campaign finance issues are complicated in the United States by the fact that the funding sources of the Republican and Democratic parties differ so sharply. As a result, any reforms intended to affect one kind of funding are likely to adversely and disproportionately affect one of the two parties. Furthermore, while most issues on which elected officials decide concern benefits for constituents. Campaign finance reform involves changing an institution that benefitsRead MoreEssay on Campaign Finance Reform1003 Words   |  5 PagesCampaign Finance Reform The politics is a stage for many different characters of whom each is trying to convince their audience to give them the loudest cheer and the grand applause. Politicians who played the acts will do their best and sometimes will do everything to win the hearts of their audience and that means to win at all cost. Politics involves money for it is the way to make campaign possible that is why there are campaign managers and campaign funds to whoever will run for any officeRead MoreThe First Step Towards Lasting Campaign Finance Reform2697 Words   |  11 PagesFinal Paper: The First Step Towards Lasting Campaign Finance Reform â€Å"You don t put vote Bartlet in the ad, you can pay for it with unmarked bills from a bank heist if you want to.† - Bruno Gianelli (Fictional character, The West Wing, S03E06, â€Å"Gone Quiet†)1 Debates about the just and proper financing of campaigns for public office can be traced as far back as the Federalist Papers. On one side are those that believe any restriction in the frequency or amount of individual, corporate orRead MoreCampaign Finance Reform Essay782 Words   |  4 PagesCampaign Finance Reform Effective election campaigns have always relied on the candidates’ ability to raise money. Even in the days before television, radio and the internet, it still took money to get the word out to the people in a far-flung land. However, today’s candidates are faced with raising larger and larger amounts of money with each new election that comes along. Individuals are the primary source of campaign funding at the federal level, with political action committees runningRead MoreWhat Is Campaign Finance Reform?1342 Words   |  6 PagesOverview What is Campaign Finance Reform? Campaign finance regulation refers to attempts to regulate the ways in which political campaigns are funded. This includes all spending done to promote or support the promotion of candidates, ballot measures, political parties and more. Regulations can be applied to natural persons, corporations, political action committees, political parties and other organizations. They can come in the form of incentives, such as providing public financing to candidatesRead MorePolitical Campaign Finance Reform Essay1895 Words   |  8 PagesIn a country where democracy is at the heart of all citizens, these citizens need to have a stronger voice when it comes to elections. This is why the implementation of an amendment that reforms the financing of campaigns is disputed greatly among scholars and political officials alike. The Supreme Court has ruled that corporations are entitled to first amendment rights, but the basis of this ruling is unclear. Unfortunately the overturning of such a ruling w ould not even guarantee a restored democracyRead MoreCampaign Finance Reform and the Necessity of Democracy Essay1492 Words   |  6 PagesCampaign Finance Reform and the Necessity of Democracy One of the major notions of the American system of government is that it is a government by the people, for the people. The system is supposed to take into account the opinions and desires off all those who fall under its jurisdiction. This is said to be accomplished by a representative democracy, where citizens elect one of there own to speak for the group (Hastings, 04). Therefore, it is reasonable to infer that any eligible manRead MoreCampaign Finance Reform Essay1544 Words   |  7 PagesCampaign Finance Reform The Democratic and Republican presidential nominees for 1999 raised an astounding 126 million to finance their campaigns in the primaries (Godfrey). The U.S. national political parties raised a record 107.2 million dollars in soft money contributions in 1999 (Campaign Finance Reform). During the 1995-96 elections, public citizens estimated that an astounding 150 million dollars was spent on phony issue ads designed to support or oppose congressional and presidentialRead MoreCampaign Finance Reform Should Be Restricted And Monitored1780 Words   |  8 PagesIn American society, campaign finance reform is continuously a topic of discussion. This year’s 2016 election will be the most expensive campaign with presidential candidates Donald Trump and Hilary Clinton is running for office. By this coming November, campaign spending for all candidates spending for all candidates who ran in this year’s election will be an estimated total of 4.4 billion dollars (â€Å"Do We Re ally Need†). For campaign finance to experience reform, we must first acknowledge that theRead MoreEssay about Campaign Finance Reform1256 Words   |  6 PagesCampaign Finance Reform With the introduction of â€Å"soft† money in politics, elections no longer go to the best candidate, but simply to the richer one. Soft money is defined as unregulated money that is given to the political parties that ends up being used by candidates in an election. In last year’s elections, the Republican and Democratic parties raised more than one-half of a billion dollars in soft money. Current politicians are pushing the envelope farther than any previous administrations