09 July 2014

BOOK: Reasoning Rights

Comparative Judicial Engagement
Edited by Liora Lazarus, Christopher McCrudden and Nigel Bowles
 
This book is about judicial reasoning in human rights cases. The aim is to explore the question: how is it that notionally universal norms are reasoned by courts in such significantly different ways? What is the shape of this reasoning; which techniques are common across the transnational jurisprudence; and which are particular?
 
The book, comprising contributions by a team of world-leading human rights scholars, moves beyond simply addressing the institutional questions concerning courts and human rights, which often dominate discussions of this kind, seeking instead a deeper examination of the similarities and divergence of reasonings by different courts when addressing comparable human rights questions. These differences, while partly influenced by institutional concerns, cannot be attributed to them alone. This book explores the diverse and rich underlying spectrum of human rights reasoning, as a distinctive and particular form of legal reasoning, evident in the case studies across the selected jurisdictions.
 
Liora Lazarus is a Fellow in Law and Associate Professor in Law at St Anne's College, University of Oxford.
Christopher McCrudden FBA is Professor of Equality and Human Rights Law, Queen's University Belfast; William W Cook Global Professor of Law at University of Michigan Law School; and a member of Blackstone Chambers.
Nigel Bowles is Director of the Rothermere American Institute at the University of Oxford.
 

CALL FOR PAPER: De-juridification: Appearance and disappearance of law at a time of crisis

UK IVR Annual Conference
25-26 October 2014 

De-juridification: Appearance and disappearance of law at a time of crisis
London School of Economics and Political Science
New deadline: 1 August 2014


It was not too long ago that many legal philosophers and sociologists were expressing deep concerns about juridification, i.e. law’s expansion as a mode of governance and its distorting effects on social relations. 
Now, however, under conditions of globalisation and in the midst of a global crisis, there are several indications that the trend of juridification is being reversed, that law is subsiding and giving way to other modes of governance. With governments offloading many of their central tasks to civil society, with international economic agencies exercising normative authority, with people seemingly recognising each other more as economic actors than as legal subjects, and with the interpretation of indeterminate laws being carried out not by courts but by actual power-holders, to mention only very few examples, it seems appropriate to ask questions regarding a process of de-juridification which seems to be afoot. 
The main aim of the conference is to explore various aspects of de-juridification. Contributions are invited from legal philosophy, socio-legal theory, legal anthropology, and other law-related disciplines to tackle questions such as the following: Is a process of de-juridification underway? In which contexts does law recede? What replaces it and how? Does less law mean more or less politics? Does it entail a shift in the meaning of legitimacy?

Keynote Speakers:
Professor Peer Zumbansen, Osgoode Hall School of Law
Professor Antje Wiener, University of Hamburg

Roundtable discussants
Professor Emilios Christodoulidis, University of Glasgow
Professor Dora Kostakopoulou, Warwick University
Dr Fernanda Pirie, Oxford University, Director of the Oxford Centre for Socio-Legal Studies


Abstracts of up to 200 words should be sent to the treasurer of the UK IVR executive, Dr Emmanuel Melissaris (e.melissaris@lse.ac.uk), by 1 August 2014.

The conference is supported by the Law DepartmentLondon School of Economics.

Recent Posts