26 September 2022

Adjudicating Revolution: Courts and Constitutional Change


Adjudicating Revolution:
Courts and Constitutional Change

Edward Elgar has published Adjudicating RevolutionAdjudicating Revolution: Courts and Constitutional Change: Courts and Constitutional Change by Richard S. Kay and Joel Colon-Rios. The book is a comparative study of eight jurisdictions in which courts have been called on to render judgments on the legality of a revolutionary regime, one that has established itself in violation of governing constitutional rules.

In its introductory chapter (which the publisher has made available online, https://www.elgaronline.com/download/pdf/book/9781788971331/book-part-9781788971331-6.xml), the book sets out the paradoxical nature of such litigation. In ordinary discourse, the act of revolution, by definition displaces the authority of prior law. What law then are courts supposed to apply in adjudicating the revolution’s legality? Still, as the authors demonstrate, the decisions in several jurisdictions have coalesced around a few common doctrines. These include the judicial recognition of de facto governments, an approach apparently motivated by the need to maintain some level of public order. The same considerations underlie judgments that accord legal status to acts on the basis of social “necessity.” A final “law” of revolutionary change focuses on the existence of conditions demonstrating that the underlying assumptions of a legal system have undergone a fundamental and permanent alteration. Several of the courts confronting such a claim have relied on the theoretical work of Hans Kelsen. They undertake an examination of whether or not a jurisdiction’s Basic Norm has been replaced. This usually boils down to an evaluation of the extent to which the new government has been firmly established and whether its policy choices have been effective.

These doctrinal devices have been frequently employed by courts in cases where individuals have challenged the acts of revolutionary governments. The exact way in which they have been used differs depending on the historical, social and legal context in the particular jurisdiction involved. The remaining eight chapters each consist of an intensive examination of judicial actions in a particular regime that had undergone or was undergoing revolutionary change. In two of the situations studied, the Confederate States and the Rhodesian Republic, the law-breaking state’s institutions were short lived. In the former, the prior legal system, that of the United States, was restored in the rebellious southern states. In the latter, a brief transitional restoration of British colonial authority was followed by the inauguration of a new legal system based on universal suffrage. 

In another chapter, that dealing with Spain and Catalonia, the “revolution” that was the subject of judicial scrutiny was still a hypothetical one. In these three situations, it may have been relatively easier for courts to evaluate the revolutionary movement against the rules of the constitutional state against which it had been launched since, at the time of decision, that legal state, at least in some form, was still up and functioning. When the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council was confronted with a situation in which the rebellious Rhodesian government was in full control of the territory in Africa, it was still able to resist the conclusion that a successful revolution had taken place by noting that the legal government of  the United Kingdom (of which, of course, the Privy Council was itself an agency) was “taking steps to regain control and it is impossible to predict with certainty whether or not it will succeed.” When this judgment failed to move the rebellious government, however, things looked different to the courts on the ground in Rhodesia, who finally acknowledged that a new de jure state had been successfully established. The Constitutional Court of Spain, when adjudicating the legality of a hypothetical independent Catalonian state, may well have seen itself as in a similar position as the Privy Council in the Rhodesia case. That Court sat in Madrid and again, it was a part of a legal system that was effective and fully functioning.  Strict legality according to the Spanish legal system must have seemed to be the natural, if not the inevitable course. 

The other five chapters, examine instances of post-revolutionary adjudication in Argentina, Colombia, Grenada, Peru and Fiji. They deal with cases in which the courts were confronted with a rather different situation. In each the new revolutionary governments  were, to various extents, successfully governing the respective territories. In such cases, judges may rationally decide that application of the law of the ousted state would be an exercise in irrelevance. They have, therefore, usually called on the doctrines of necessity or de facto government to provide a justification for recognizing the reality of the political situation while, at the same time, clothing the new regime with legal or at least legalistic authority. While the basic frameworks of these doctrines are the same in all the cases studies, their application both at the time of revolution and in the period following it exhibit different characteristics depending among other things on prevailing attitudes towards the previous government and attachment to “the rule of law.” In addition to a close analysis of the judicial decision each chapter follows the subsequent events in each jurisdiction and how the judicial intervention influenced – or failed to influence—the constitutional system.

19 September 2022

Call for Papers, 5th Worldwide Congress of WSMJJ: “Mixity in the Private and/or Public Law”

 


CALL FOR PAPERS

The Fifth Worldwide Congress of the World Society of Mixed Jurisdiction Jurists will be held June 14-16, 2023 in Malta.

The theme of the Congress isMixity in the Private and/or Public Law”.

The World Society of Mixed Jurisdiction Jurists is pleased to announce its Fifth Worldwide Congress, which is to be held at the University of Malta’s Faculty of Law, from an opening evening reception and lecture on 14 June through closure on 16 June 2023.

Mixed Jurisdictions, as they are traditionally understood, stand at the crossroads of the Common law and Civil law. They frequently encompass other ethnic and religious laws. Rich in legal history and complex pluralism, they are often seen as natural laboratories of comparative law.

The laws, methods, and institutions of mixed jurisdictions are inevitably affected by the influence and presence of different traditions vying for supremacy or requiring reconciliation. Their mixity, however, is not restricted to the private law alone, but is often evident in the public law as well, such as in the criminal, administrative and constitutional law.  

We propose in this Fifth Worldwide Congress to investigate mixity wherever it may appear in these legal systems.

Proposals for papers on any topic related to the above theme, whether relating to private or public law (or both) are welcome. Proposals may be submitted by jurists from any jurisdiction, and by members and non-members of the Society alike.

Proposals should be submitted via email to Professor Vernon Palmer, President of the WSMJJ, (vpalmer@tulane.edu) by 15 October 2022. Authors will be notified by 15 November 2022 whether their proposal has been accepted. Submissions from scholars with historically underrepresented viewpoints –including women scholars, BIPOC scholars, and scholars from the Global South—are particularly welcome. Submissions should not exceed 500 words and should be accompanied by a curriculum vitae of one page only. The time allocated for delivery of papers will be no longer than 20 minutes. All papers delivered at the conference will be considered for publication.

 

 


15 August 2022

World Society of Mixed Jurisdiction Jurists - Fifth Worldwide Congress - Call for papers

 


CALL FOR PAPERS

The Fifth Worldwide Congress of the World Society of Mixed Jurisdiction Jurists will be held June 14-16, 2023 in Malta.

The theme of the Congress is “Mixity in the Private and/or Public Law”.

The World Society of Mixed Jurisdiction Jurists is pleased to announce its Fifth Worldwide Congress, which is to be held at the University of Malta’s Faculty of Law, from an opening evening reception and lecture on 14 June through closure on 16 June 2023.

Mixed Jurisdictions, as they are traditionally understood, stand at the crossroads of the Common law and Civil law. They frequently encompass other ethnic and religious laws. Rich in legal history and complex pluralism, they are often seen as natural laboratories of comparative law.

The laws, methods, and institutions of mixed jurisdictions are inevitably affected by the influence and presence of different traditions vying for supremacy or requiring reconciliation. Their mixity, however, is not restricted to the private law alone, but is often evident in the public law as well, such as in the criminal, administrative and constitutional law.  

We propose in this Fifth Worldwide Congress to investigate mixity wherever it may appear in these legal systems.

Proposals for papers on any topic related to the above theme, whether relating to private or public law (or both) are welcome. Proposals may be submitted by jurists from any jurisdiction, and by members and non-members of the Society alike.

Proposals should be submitted via email to Professor Vernon Palmer, President of the WSMJJ, (vpalmer@tulane.edu) by 15 October 2022. 

Authors will be notified by 15 November 2022 whether their proposal has been accepted. 

Submissions from scholars with historically underrepresented viewpoints –including women scholars, BIPOC scholars, and scholars from the Global South—are particularly welcome. 

Submissions should not exceed 500 words and should be accompanied by a curriculum vitae of one page only. 

The time allocated for delivery of papers will be no longer than 20 minutes. 

All papers delivered at the conference will be considered for publication.

 

 

 

Fifth International Legal Linguistics Workshop (ILLWS22) - Call for abstracts

 




Call for Abstracts

The fifth International Legal Linguistics Workshop (ILLWS22) will be held on 10th December 2022 online and co-hosted by the Austrian Association of Legal Linguistics (AALL) and the Department of African Language Studies at the University of the Western Cape, South Africa. The focus of the workshop is legal linguistics under the theme “Legal Linguistics around the globe”. It will primarily address, but is not limited to, questions such as:

- How can critical legal linguistics provide practical answers to questions of national and international language planning and policy in legal contexts?

- What is critical about critical applied legal linguistics and/or critical sociolinguistics?

- How can legal linguistics improve the delivery of justice in monolingual legal systems?

- What is the role of critical legal linguistics in the investigation of power struggles in the world of law and legislation?

- Which contributions can critical legal linguists make in reducing obstacles of participation in sensitive human rights contexts?

- What is the role and impact of disruptive technologies on the transformation of legal systems?

- What are the avenues of interdisciplinary collaboration between critical legal linguistics and research on international business communication?

- How can the notion of critique in legal linguistics contribute to critical legal language teaching in law schools?

Abstracts should be 200-300 words (excluding references and keywords) and should include 3-5 keywords and a selection of key references (3-5). Please also include information regarding the author(s), such as name(s) and affiliation(s).

Abstracts will be accepted in the following languages:

  • English
  • isiXhosa
  • German

Submissions should be sent to co-organisers:

  • Mr Daniel Green: daniel.green@wu.ac.at, and 
  • Dr Zakeera Docrat: zakeera.d@gmail.com

Deadline for submissions: 1st November 2022

29 July 2022

Humbolt Residency Programme

Humboldt Residency Programme 




Humboldt Residency Programme



Illustration of crowd protesting for human rights with blank signs and flag


The numerous challenges facing us today – such as climate change, the emergence of zoonoses and the current COVID-19 pandemic – clearly demonstrate that the benefits to society as well as the visibility of scientifically generated knowledge partly depend on sharing ideas with other sectors of society.


Headed by annually changing hosts, the Humboldt Residency Programme seeks to bring together Humboldtians and other researchers with actors in civil society, journalists, entrepreneurs and artists to work on a common topic during the residency.


In the form of media formats, events and publications, this programme aims to generate tangible new impetus in academia, society and politics. The programme reinforces innovation by transdisciplinary cooperation beyond the boundaries of science.


Contact

Alexander von Humboldt Foundation (Berlin Office)

Humboldt Residency Programme

Markgrafenstr. 37

10117 Berlin


residency[at]avh.de


 


Humboldt Residency Programme 2022




Creative Lead of the Cohort: Cynthia Miller-Idriss // Alumni*ae of the Humboldt Foundation: Julia Elad-Strenger, Cristóbal Rovira Kaltwasser, Richard Mole, Mala Pandurang, Christa Rautenbach // Junior Researchers: Meili K. Criezis, Pasha Dashtgard, Nikola Karasová, Lea Kuhar, Alexander Stagnell // Civil Society Actors: Ronen Steinke, Angela Saini, Gayatri Parameswaran, Amina Atiq


Cohort 2022 (PDF, 2 MB): Humboldt-Residency-Programme_Cohort


Social cohesion


What is it that holds the world together? If we follow current developments around the globe, this question seems more urgent than ever. The rise in populist and authoritarian activity, increasing polarisation in the media, hate speech, right-wing radicalism and religious conflicts are eroding democratic life and social cohesion. At the same time, science, art and politics bear a special responsibility for explaining anti-democratic structures and connecting knowledge for the benefit of the community as a whole.


The Humboldt Residency Programme is designed not only to sound out current trends in social division but also new forms of (digital) communitarisation in its academic contexts and, at the same time, to address them in a creative and communicative fashion. By launching the Humboldt Residency Programme in spring 2022, the Humboldt Foundation is sending a signal on behalf of communality and cross-disciplinary collaborations both on the level of content and structure.


Participants


Creative Lead of the Cohort:


  • Prof. Dr. Cynthia Miller-Idriss, American University, Washington D.C.


Alumni of the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation:


  • Dr. Julia Elad-Strenger, Bar Ilan University, Tel Aviv
  • Prof. Dr. Cristóbal Rovira Kaltwasser, Diego Portales University, Santiago de Chile
  • Prof. Dr. Richard Mole, UCL School of Slavonic and East European Studies (SSEES), London
  • Prof. Dr. Mala Pandurang, Dr. BMN College, Mumbai
  • Prof. Dr. Christa Rautenbach, North-West University, Potchefstroom


Junior Researchers:


  • Meili K. Criezis, American University, Washington D.C.
  • Pasha Dashtgard, University of California-Irvine
  • Dr. Nikola Karasová, Czech Academy of Sciences
  • Dr. Lea Kuhar, Scientific Research Centre of the Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts Ljubljana
  • Dr. Alexander Stagnell, Södertörn University, Huddinge
Journalists, Authors, Artists:
  • Dr. Ronen Steinke, Germany
  • Angela Saini, USA/UK
  • Gayatri Parameswaran, India/Germany
  • Amina Atiq, Yemen/UK


Humboldt Residency Diary


Every week, the participants of the Humboldt Residency Programme report on their personal highlights of living and working as an international and interdisciplinary team in Berlin.

23rd International Roundtables for the Semiotics of Law - Global Semiotics and Everyday Legal Claims Intercultural Use of Law, Interreligious Dialogue and Translation Ethics

 



CALL FOR PAPERS 

23rd International Roundtables for the Semiotics of Law – IRSL 2023 

24-27 May 2023 – Roma (Italy) 

Organizer: Mario Ricca Hosted by Pontificia Università Antonianum 

Via Merulana, 124 – Roma 

Auditorium Antonianum, Viale Manzoni, 1 – Roma 

http://www.auditoriumantonianum.it/

IRSL President: Anne Wagner 

Global Semiotics and Everyday Legal Claims

Intercultural Use of Law, Interreligious Dialogue and Translation Ethics 

Postponement notice due to COVID-19 

In view of the prolonged effects of the pandemic, we have decided for security reasons to postpone the 23rd IRSL initially planned for May 27-29, 2021 to the new date of May 24-27, 2023, so as to be able to host all participants in Rome and make possible face-to-face encounters. We will take advantage of the postponement to enrich the call by adding a number of sub-calls. We also strongly encourage the submission of workshop proposals. Our aim is to organize a series of webinars in May 2023 featuring the presentation of papers that we hope will pave the way for a genuine interdisciplinary dialogue among participants from different research areas and disciplines during the conference. To achieve this hybrid and diachronic conference plan, we will set up a web page with links to the sub-calls and the webinars to be organized. 

https://www.facebook.com/23rd-International-Roundtable-for-the-Semiotics-of-Law-104582274856461

The relationship between legal rules and the spaces where they become effective is gradually morphing. This change is precipitated by semantic or cognitive—rather than exclusively political— circumstances. The meaning of legal rules is continually challenged by the transformation of their spatial projections and their cultural coordinates. Law can no longer assume that discrete spatial circuits and particular cultural backgrounds coincide. Conversely, each territorial frame, sometimes even those that are most distant from metropolitan areas, can function (at least potentially) as a hub of innumerous threads of actions and interests. All these connections impinge on the significance of legal rules and, especially, the prognosis for their effectiveness. The daily life of law is affected by this spatial-semantic turmoil. 

The present law’s dynamic involves the conflation of different spatial and semantic frames merging reciprocal ‘elsewheres’ and giving social phenomena and the consequences of their legal regulation a kind of ubiquity—at least in potential terms. This means that the understanding of what is ‘here’ and ‘now’ should be unmoored from any reification or thinghood attached to empirical events, objects, situations, etc. On the contrary, to grasp the ‘real’ phenomenality of events/objects/situations, namely what they are, and the consequences of the application of one legal rule rather than another, each of these should be considered as a sign. A semiotic gaze allows for the remolding of the meaningful connections underlying what we call ‘things’ and ‘events’ so that they might be readjusted to align with the new scale of spatial implications between the multi-sited and worldwide determinants of what happens and is evaluated in each ‘here.’ The interpenetrations between multiple ‘elsewheres’ call for a global semiotic understanding that makes the legal interpreter (and even the lawmakers) cognizant of the semantic and spatial web underlying any ‘fact’ to be ruled. The ability to grasp the threads of meaning comprising what is perceived as a ‘fact’ is also a prerequisite to envisaging the consequences of the application of each legal rule as well as the legitimacy of such application with regard to its axiological and teleological prerequisites. 

All this implies an effort to translate the ‘other’ spaces of experience implied in the understanding of the ‘present facts’ to be ruled, followed by an intercultural translation between the different circuits of experience this understanding involves. Furthermore, insofar as culture enshrines the anthropological and historical projections of religious horizons of meaning, any attempt to give course to intercultural translations implies and intersects with the promotion of interreligious dialogue. The anthropological schemas rooted in religious imageries, on the other hand, mold even the secularized spaces of experiences and the related categorical schemas that people use to define them. Spatial and semantic Otherness, from this point of view, is therefore to be translated as an ingredient already involved in the production of the present and daily experience of people. In this sense and beyond any identitarian reification of culture, the ability to realize the semantic and pragmatic closeness of what is physically remote can be consistently enhanced by engaging with experiential elements as signs able to be reconfigured/aggregated in new categorical frames.

The aim of the conference is to bring together semioticians, anthropologists, geographers, law theorists and legal practitioners (experts in civil law, business law, family law, international law, legal anthropology, etc.) to show how the semiotic approach can function as a powerful support to face the present challenges of legal experience and transform legal practices into an outpost for an emancipatory and “bottom-up” intercultural use of law. 

In line with the above, multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary proposals will be welcomed in the hope that they can help trigger a transdisciplinary collaboration aimed to give legal practitioners new instruments to attune people’s experience with their renewed understanding of the real spatial/semantic coordinates shaping their lived environments. 

Contributions are requested for—but not limited to—the following topics: 

- Local actions, global meanings: the spatial threads and legal relevance of facts. 

- The embodiment of language and the worldwide spatialities of human rights. 

- Language and Spaces in Global and Contextualised Human Rights Discourse. 

- Justice for work: intercultural communications and the semiotics of worldwide economics. 

- Legal assistance and the ubiquitous omnipresent: the connections of the legal subject. 

- The facticity/normativity divide when faced with intercultural dynamics: critical and renewing approaches. 

- Beyond the Anthropocene: the legal semiotics of ecological sustainability and human subjectivity. 

- Translating multi-dimensional/multi-sited ordinary life experiences and the intercultural semiotics of rights. 

- Legal practitioners (lawyers, notaries, accountants) and the intercultural use of law. 

- Against exotic legality: cultural difference as cognitive diffraction in daily legal experience. 

- Secularization and religion: is the secularization of law a limit to the understanding of the interpenetration between religion and cultures? 

- Secularization and religion: is it possible to envisage a legal intercultural secularization as a remedy to the cognitive/cultural defectiveness of the idea of the political ‘neutrality’ of institutions? 

- Interreligious dialogue and semiosic translation as an anthropological means of molding an intercultural legal lexicon. 

- The intercultural use of law and semiosic translation/transaction beyond the multiculturalism/interculturalism divide. 

- Global healthcare programs, cultural behavioral patterns and intercultural schemes of body/environment relationships. Is it possible to avert, or monitor in a timely way, future global pandemics? 

Abstracts of 300 words (max.) should be submitted by January 6, 2023 to both Mario Ricca (Organizer: mario.ricca@icloud.com) and Anne Wagner (valwagnerfr@yahoo.com) with decisions made by January 20, 2023

The proposals regarding sub-calls, workshops and webinars can be submitted from now on. 

Selected papers will be invited for publication in a Special issue of the International Journal for the Semiotics of Law (Springer: https://www.springer.com/journal/11196) and/or for inclusion in an edited volume of the Law Book Series (Law and Visual Jurisprudence – Springer: https://www.springer.com/series/16413). 

Respecting the tradition, the roundtable languages will be English and French.

Organizational Committee: Mario Ricca, Anne Wagner, Lluis Oviedo, Peter Petkoff, Paolo di Lucia, Paolo Heritier, Alessandro Saggioro, Giancarlo Anello, Silvia Zorzetto, Giuditta Bassani, Riccardo Bertolotti, Kay Lalor, Jenny Ponzo, Melisa Vazquez.

01 July 2022

Language and Legal Interpretation in International Law, edited by Anne Lise Kjaer and Joanna Lam

 

Language and Legal Interpretation in International Law

Edited by Anne Lise Kjaer and Joanna Lam

Oxford Studies in Language and Law

  • Examines patterns and strategies of legal interpretation across different fields of international dispute resolution
  • Takes an interdisciplinary approach through multiple research perspectives in language and law
  • Considers interpretation in the fields of trade law and commercial law, EU law, human rights law, and international criminal law

PAVIA 7-8 July 2022 - FOOD LAW AND RIGHT TO FOOD

 


The Academy is supporting the Congress on Food Law and the Right to Food organised by IACL Vice-President Giuseppe Franco Ferrari in Pavia on July 7-8 2022.

L’Académie soutient le Congrès sur le droit alimentaire et le droit à l’alimentation organisé par le vice-président de l’AIDC Giuseppe Franco Ferrari à Pavie les 7 et 8 juillet 2022.

PROGRAMME (ENGLISH)

STREAMING LINK

30 May 2022

Whither the West? International Law in Europe and the United States

 Whither the West?International Law in Europe and the United States

Chiara Giorgetti, University of Richmond 
Guglielmo Verdirame, King's College London 

On a variety of international legal matters, relations between the US and European countries are evolving and even diverging. In an ever-changing world, understanding the reasons for this increasing dichotomy is fundamental and has a profound impact on our understanding of world dynamics and globalization and, ultimately, on our awareness of where the West is going. This interdisciplinary volume proposes new frameworks to understand the differences in approach to international law in the US and Europe. To explain the theoretical and historical underpinnings of the diverging views, the expert essays present new research and develop innovative conclusions. They assess and explore issues such as the idea of sovereignty, constitutional law, the use of force, treaty law and international adjudication. Leading authorities in different disciplines including law and political science, the contributors engage in a new dialogue and develop a new discourse on inter-Atlantic views.

Introduction: W[h]ither the west? The divided west and the shifting grounds of international law; Part I. The Idea of International Law in the Divided West: 1. International lawyers and legal forms transatlantic denials; 2. Are we (Americans) all international legal realists now?; 3. Are liberal internationalists still liberal?; 4. The new, new sovereigntism or how the European union became disenchanted with international law and defiantly protective of its domestic legal order; Part II. Specific Areas in International Law: Whither the West?: 5. Authority and dialogue state and official immunity in domestic and international courts; 6. Treaty conditions and constitutions walls, windows, or doors; 7. International courts and tribunals in the USA and in Europe the increasingly divided west; 8. Unravelling a paradox of shared responsibility the disconnection between substantive and adjudicate law; 9. Divergent views on the content and relevance of the jus ad Bellum in Europe and the United States? The case of the US-Led military coalition against ‘Islamic state'.

Freedom of Expression - The Revolutionary Roots of American and French Legal Thought

 

Freedom of Expression 

The Revolutionary Roots of American and French Legal  Thought 

Ioanna Tourkochoriti 

National University of Ireland, Galway 

Two legal systems founded from similar Enlightenment philosophical and political values use state coercion differently to regulate a core liberty: the freedom of expression. This comparative study of France and the United States proposes a novel theory of how the limits of freedom of expression are informed by different revolutionary experiences and constitutional and political arrangements. Ioanna Tourkochoriti argues that the different ways freedom of expression is balanced against other values in France and the United States can be understood in reference to the role of the government and the understanding of republicanism and liberty. This understanding affects how jurists define the content and the limits of a liberty and strike a balance between liberties in conflict. Exploring both the legal traditions of the two countries, this study sheds new light on the broader historical, social and philosophical contexts in which jurists operate. 

1. Introduction: speech, privacy and dignity in France and the United States; 2. Antiquity, modernity, and historical imaginaries on the role of the government; 3. The underlying ex ante understanding of liberty; 4. The moralizing rational republic versus the state arbitrator of the free play of interests; 5. Foundation of the rights of man on the rights of the citizen versus foundation of the rights of the citizen on the rights of man; 6. Conclusion.