How, in a context of growing critiques of financialization, can law contribute to protecting the legitimacy of finance? This paper argues that the assignment of responsibilities between individuals and organizations plays a decisive role, using the recent Libor scandal as an empirical illustration. To do so, the paper offers a Foucauldian framework, the differential management of financial illegalisms, dedicated to the study of illegalities in financial capitalism. The comparison of the legal treatment of two manipulations of Libor, this key benchmark in financial markets, reveals how mid‐level traders have been the object of criminal prosecution, while law undervalued the role of top managers and organizations. To capture how differential management is performed in practice, I analyze precisely how the conflict‐resolution devices (criminal trial vs. settlement) and the social categorizations prevailing in the two manipulations of Libor favor different forms of responsibility, individual or organizational. I conclude by exploring the implications of law's relationship to financial legitimacy.

中文翻译：

---

金融违法行为的差异化管理：Libor丑闻中的责任分配

在对金融化的批评日益增加的背景下，法律如何为保护金融合法性做出贡献？本文认为，使用最近的Libor丑闻作为经验例证，个人与组织之间的责任分配起着决定性的作用。为此，本文提供了一个Foucauldian框架，即金融非法主义的差异管理，致力于研究金融资本主义的非法行为。通过比较两种操纵Libor的法律待遇，这是金融市场的主要基准，揭示了中级交易者如何成为刑事起诉的对象，而法律却低估了高级管理人员和组织的作用。要了解实践中如何执行差异管理，我精确地分析了解决Libor的两种手段（刑事审判与和解）和在Libor的两种操纵中普遍存在的社会分类如何支持不同形式的责任，无论是个人还是组织。最后，我探讨了法律关系与金融合法性之间的关系。