The counter-terrorist financing (CFT) and the anti-money laundering (AML) regime is one of the broadest systems of global regulatory governance which integrates commitments in the form of binding treaties, soft law standards, and transnational networks of enforcement. This paper follows its development since the disjointed structure of the 1980s to the modern day issues of digital finance. It shows that AML/CFT governance is a hybrid order, which combines hierarchical treaties, FATF soft law, regulatory networks, and reputational incentives, through doctrinal analysis of the Vienna Convention (1988), Palermo Convention (2000), UNCAC (2003), and the International Convention of the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism (1999). Even though financial action taskforce (FATF) does not have a formal treaty power, it enjoys de facto normative power due to compliance pressures. Based on FATF mutual evaluation (2013-2024), the article identifies the continuous disparity between technical compliance and operational quality, especially in the developing states, and suggests a model of reform to reconcile the norm diffusion with the ability to substantially enforce the rules.

Generative AI tools are reshaping academic writing. The central issue is not their use, but when AI-assisted text can still be recognised as legitimate scholarly work. This exploratory study examines how experienced academics evaluate legitimacy through three conditions: retention of human responsibility for core ideas, limitation of AI to supportive roles, and disclosure of its use. Data were collected from 25 participants through a questionnaire combining rating scales and open-ended responses. The findings show that legitimacy is conditional rather than binary. Participants accepted AI for drafting, rephrasing, and organising text, but expressed concern when it shaped arguments or interpretations. Across responses, three conditions consistently defined acceptable use: AI must support rather than replace intellectual work, authors must remain accountable for all claims, and AI involvement must be disclosed. Legitimacy, therefore, rests on ongoing professional judgment rather than fixed rules.