The rule of law after globalisation: is myth or reality?

Rising Authoritarianism(s) and the Globalization of Law: An Initial Exploration, 2019

This article explores the question “what does the future hold for the globalization of law?” In analyzing the future of legal globalization, I suggest that analyzing the recent rise of authoritarianism, both at the national as well as transnational plane, offers significant insights. I make three related observations regarding the rise of authoritarian politics. First, the rise of authoritarian and semi-authoritarian regimes and the blend of populism with authoritarianism at the national contexts seems to obstruct globalization of law. This is likely due to the fact that the power of authoritarian politics mostly comes from their populist appeal to the masses who stand to lose from globalization. For such appeal to continue, authoritarian politicians cultivate antiglobalization rhetoric and practices. The end result is a move away from globalized relations and institutional connectedness between different national legal systems. The similarity of the grammar out of which such authoritarianism is produced in various different national contexts, however, urges us to reflect on the globalized relations that structure such similarity. Second, the rise of authoritarian tendencies in domestic and supranational institutions, particularly in the name of political and economic emergency, may bring about a level of legal uniformity and thus globalization of law. I suggest, however, that what globalizes in such context is an essentially instrumentalized version of law, and a deeper reflection on “what globalizes?” is required as well as whether it could properly be called “law.” Third, as an extension of the second point, this article focuses on neoliberalism as the broad political economic background that informs the globalization of law in the post- 1980 period. I suggest that the instrumentalization of law, both domestically and internationally, is rendered possible by the fact that, under a neoliberal economic way of thinking and practice, economization spreads to all spheres of life and renders other institutional settings adjunct to itself. Such instrumentalization also includes the law and takes away from the power of this institutional field.

LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing, 2020

The rule of law state: realities and prospects of development in the context of globalization 2 UDC 340.12:316.42](477) P 78

Iuri operam daturum prius nosse oportet, unde nomen iuris descendat. est autem a iustitia appellatum: nam, ut eleganter Celsus definit, ius est ars boni et aequi.

Russian Journal of Comparative Law, 2018

The aim of this paper is to determine the character, method and causes of the globalization of law, that is, the contemporary phenomenon of the increasing harmonization of national legislations at a global level, primarily with international law, as well as with each other. In doing so, we have used the method of text analysis, formal-legal method, comparative method and statistical methods. The subject of our research is the relation between the general social process of globalization and the phenomenon of global harmonization of national legislations, in other words, the creation of the law proceeding from the harmonization of legal institutes, solutions and entire legal systems from international law or one country or culture, or to another country or culture, which is, in the legal theory, called "globalization of law". We have found that the character of the process of globalization of law should be positioned amongst the extreme views of the prominent authors in this field, and that the legal reception, primarily from international law, is the prevailing method of global harmonization of law. Also, the causes of the social process of globalization are simultaneously the causes of harmonization of national legislations at a global level. According to the type of factors, all causes of globalization of law are classified as objective and subjective. Furthermore, the characteristics of four groups of objective factors – technological, economic, political and cultural - have been presented, as well as significant examples. In addition to this, the characteristics of the group of subjective causes and the most significant factors of this group have been presented.

Diponegoro Law Review

The dominance of global capitalism is the result of a long historical process in Western Europe since the Enlightenment in the seventeenth century, the philosophers led by a very large influence on the political-economic thought and legal relationship with the state and its citizens.Capitalism and free market mechanisms become increasingly strong with sustained legal concept of rule of law. The principle of the rule of law actually originally not intended to be a means of achieving public objectives or to solve the problems of society such as the problem of poverty. Rule of law is intended to create a stable structure for individuals and businesses associated with economic activities.Linkage between laissez faire, the rule of law is logically implicated in the growth of the view that the existence of the state is to protect the free market. That is phenomena of globalization. The dominance of the rules of law which is intended to facilitate the interests of the free market encourage...

Annual Survey of …, 2010

The following paper aims to address the question of the adequacy of Luhmann/Teubner's systemic approach to describe the legal order of "peripheral" (democratic) states under the present historical conditions, that leads to a globalization of the so-called post-industrial society. In the background we may found the major question posited by the meeting where this paper is going to be delivered, that is to say, what kind of relationship has such an approach in socio-legal studies to the critical approach.

• Participated, Presented paper and published article in National Seminar on Rule of Law and Frontiers of Judicial Activism organized by New Law College, Ahmednagar, 2016

This Article deals with the liberal and global approach with the conceptions of rule of law which differs in the specific criteria of globalization and liberalization as proposed. The huge excesses of mortality and morbidity caused and much more effectively, through global- liberal institutional reforms that would, among other things. The importance of this global-liberal on rule of law approach reaches well beyond philosophy.

2004

2014

When Fritz Kratochwil published his classic Rules, Norms and Decisions in 1989, 1 it was reviewed by an obviously bewildered David Bederman in the American Journal of International Law. 2 Clearly, it seemed, here was something international lawyers should take note of, but equally clearly, Bederman, no intellectual slouch by any standard, had a hard time figuring out what made the book relevant, or even just interesting, for international lawyers. It seems Bederman was expecting something along the lines of a description of the role of law in global politics, but no such story unfolded. Instead, Rules, Norms and Decisions posited not a description, but a way of looking at the role of norms in international politics, and did so unlike much of what had gone on before: this was neither a variation on realism, nor riding the wave of institutional liberalism, nor anything like the New Haven approach or sociological jurisprudence or Henkinstyle behaviouralism. As it turned out, Rules, Norms and Decisions became the closest thing to a manifesto of constructivism in the study of world politics, and therewith became pigeonholed as one of the three grand theories of international relations. This entailed considerable irony and, indeed, ironies abound when Kratochwil is concerned, and do so much to his delight, one suspects. One of these ironies is that Fritz Kratochwil, despite being one of the founding fathers of the grand theory of constructivism in the discipline of international relations, broadly denies the possibility of grand theory in the social sciences. Secondly, there is the irony that while Kratochwil may generally be considered as a theorist, he strongly advocates a practical orientation, distinguishing between scientific reasoning and practical reasoning. 3 And thirdly, amidst all the talk about interdisciplinary scholarship, Kratochwil is both critical of much of this work and, at the same time, arguably its leading practitioner, even if not always recognized as such. 4 For Kratochwil's The Status of Law in World Society is one of the best studies combining international law and international relations, and a few other (sub-) disciplines as well, including most obviously legal theory and political theory. The Status of Law in World Society is, in fact, a work of theory, indeed of grand theory, but it is a grand theory of detail, a grand theory denying any holistic truth claims. His aim is to analyse the political role of 1