Recent years have seen many cases where the moral transgressions of public figures have led to widespread disengagement from their work, such as no longer watching their shows or reading their books. In the academic context, this can manifest as not inviting an academic to speak, no longer citing or teaching their work, or even ending professional relationships. This paper aims to explore the question of whether there could be purely epistemic reasons that could underwrite such practices of disengagement; bracketing social, moral, or political concerns. In doing so, it addresses a common criticism: an academic’s moral transgression need not give us epistemic reasons to doubt the quality of their work, making disengaging unjustified. The main part of the paper investigates whether this criticism can be countered by viewing an academic’s moral transgressions as a defeater. After dismissing the option of undercutting defeat, it proposes a template argument for when there could be purely epistemic reasons for disengaging, namely if it takes place in areas where the moral transgression that motivates disengagement also functions as a higher order defeater.

Generative artificial intelligence (AI) systems, notably ChatGPT, have emerged in legal practice, facilitating the completion of tasks, ranging from electronic communications to the drafting of documents. The generative capabilities of these systems underscore the duty of lawyers to competently represent their clients by keeping abreast of technological developments that can enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of their work. At the same time, the processing of clients’ information through generative AI systems threatens to compromise their confidentiality if disclosed to third parties, including the systems’ providers. The present paper aims to determine the impact of the use of generative AI systems by lawyers on the duties of competence and confidentiality. The findings derive from the application of doctrinal and empirical research on the legal practice and its digitalisation in Luxembourg. The paper finally reflects on the integration of generative AI systems in legal practice to raise the quality of legal services for clients.

Despite the ubiquity of guided self-help (GSH) interventions in Primary Care psychological services, there have been no previous studies of the relationship between the competence of qualified practitioners and treatment outcomes. This study compared competence-outcome associations in two types of GSH. Competence and clinical outcome measures were drawn from a clinical trial comparing the efficacy of two types of GSH for anxiety disorders, based on cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT-GSH) or cognitive analytic therapy (CAT-GSH). These interventions were delivered over the telephone by qualified and supervised practitioners. Audio-recordings of GSH sessions (n=94) were rated using a validated competence measure. Clinical outcomes were anxiety, depression and functioning. Secondary outcomes were attendance and need for further intervention after GSH. Competence ratings were highly reliable. No significant associations were found between competence and clinical outcomes, treatment engagement or need for further intervention. In this clinical trial, GSH competence ratings were not associated with clinical outcomes. Directions for future competence-outcome research are provided for GSH interventions.

Key learning aims

1. (1) Become familiar with the current empirical literature on therapist competence and associations with clinical outcome.

2. (2) Raise awareness of a recently developed alternative form of guided self-help based on the theory and principles of cognitive analytic therapy.

3. (3) Enhance understanding of the relationship between practitioner competence and clinical outcome in guided self-help for anxiety disorders.

This article examines how European Union (EU) arms control measures are tailored to its constitutional foundations. EU Member States subject shipments of arms and components to controls so as to screen them for risks and potentially block them. In this context different Member States may make different geopolitical and humanitarian risk assessments. Existing EU measures have achieved only limited security screening harmonisation, and have left room for Member States to shirk their obligations under international humanitarian law. But in case of joint arms production, which the EU subsidises to become more autonomous, one Member State’s arms controls may block another State’s exports and thereby jeopardise cooperation. This article posits that any reform of EU arms controls should start by re-evaluating their present legal basis. A constitutional competence analysis shows that controls on arms shipments to non-EU states should be regulated in part through the Common Commercial Policy (CCP), and not just through the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP). This would be consistent with other EU regulatory regimes for trade security. While a joint CFSP-CCP approach cannot fully prevent conflict, since this would require further foreign policy harmonisation, it could help foster security convergence and strengthen humanitarian due diligence mechanisms.

While elections are an instrument to hold politicians accountable, corrupt politicians are often re-elected. A potential explanation for this paradox is that citizens trade-off integrity for competence. Voters may forgive corruption if corrupt politicians manage to deliver desirable outcomes. While previous studies have examined whether politicians’ competence moderates the negative effect of corruption, this paper focuses on voters’ priorities and directly assesses what citizens value more: integrity or favourable outcomes. Using a survey experiment, we assess citizens’ support for politicians who violate the law in order to improve the welfare of their community and, in some cases, benefit personally from these violations. The results indicate that citizens prefer a politician who follows the law, even if this leads to a suboptimal outcome. However, voters are more likely to overlook violations of the law that benefit the community if these do not result in a personal gain for politicians (i.e., in the absence of corruption). These findings suggest that the mild electoral punishment of corruption may be due to the public’s unawareness of private gains from malfeasance, or to the delay in these private benefits becoming apparent by election day.

Under closed-list proportional representation, a party's electoral list determines the order in which legislative seats are allocated to candidates. When candidates differ in their ability, parties face a trade-off between competence and incentives. Ranking candidates in decreasing order of competence ensures that elected politicians are most competent. Yet, party lists create incentives for candidates that may lead parties not to place their best candidates at the top of the list. We examine this trade-off in a game-theoretical model in which parties rank their candidates on a list, candidates choose their campaign effort, and the election is a team contest for multiple prizes. We analyze how the candidates’ objectives, voters’ attention and media coverage, incumbency, the number of parties competing in the election, and the electoral environment influence how parties rank candidates.

Building a culture of conceptual inquiry in psychiatric training requires the development of conceptual competence: the ability to identify and examine assumptions that constitute the philosophical foundations of clinical care and scientific investigation in psychiatry. In this article, we argue for the importance of such competence and illustrate approaches to instilling it through examples drawn from our collective experiences as psychiatric educators.

The dichotomy between jurisdiction and admissibility developed in public international law has drawn much attention from arbitrators and judges in recent years. Inspired by Paulsson's ‘tribunal versus claim’ lodestar, attempts have been made to transpose the distinction from public international law to investment treaty arbitration, yielding a mixed reception from tribunals. Remarkably, a second leap of transposition has found firmer footing in commercial arbitration, culminating in the prevailing view of the common law courts in England, Singapore and Hong Kong that arbitral decisions on admissibility are non-reviewable. However, this double transposition from international law to commercial arbitration is misguided. First, admissibility is a concept peculiar to international law and not embodied in domestic arbitral statutes. Second, its importation into commercial arbitration risks undermining the fundamental notion of jurisdiction grounded upon the consent of parties. Third, the duality of ‘night and day’ postulated by Paulsson to distinguish between reviewable and non-reviewable arbitral rulings is best reserved to represent the basic dichotomy between jurisdiction and merits.

Concerned with sustainably alleviating mental distress and promoting the right to health worldwide, global mental health (GMH) is practised across various contexts spanning the humanitarian-development-peace nexus. The inherently intersectoral and multidisciplinary nature of GMH calls for competency frameworks and training programmes that embody diversity, decolonisation and multiprofessionalism. Existing competency frameworks have failed to capture the multi-sectoral, inter-professional nature of contemporary GMH practice. In response to these needs, a qualitative content analysis of relevant job advertisements was conducted to distil a comprehensive set of professional competencies in contemporary GMH practice. Approximately 200 distinct skills and competencies were extracted from 70 job advertisements and organised into four meta-dimensions: ‘skills’, ‘sector’, ‘self’ and ‘subject’. The first known systematic attempt at a multi-sectoral GMH competency framework, it offers a springboard for exploring vital yet overlooked professional competencies such as resilience, self-reflection, political skills and entrepreneurialism. On this basis, recommendations for building a competent, agile and effective GMH workforce with diversified and future-proof skillsets are proposed. The framework can also inform inter-professional training and curriculum design, and capacity-building initiatives aimed at early-career professional development, particularly in low- and middle-income settings.