The Mythology of International Rule-of-Law Promotion

2019 ◽  
Vol 44 (04) ◽  
pp. 957-986 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shane Chalmers

In 1992 Peter Fitzpatrick published The Mythology of Modern Law, a work that exposed the constitutive relation between Europe’s racialized imperialism and its conception of modern law. In the three decades since, a renewed field of “law and development” has grown, this time in the name of “the rule of law.” This Article shows how the mythology of modern law endures in this field of rule-of-law development. To do this, Part I draws out the main threads from Mythology. These are then woven through the Article, beginning with the World Justice Project’s Rule of Law Index®, before turning to the United Nations’ rule-of-law assistance, and ending with the World Bank’s 2017 World Development Report. The analysis shows how the mythology of modern law, in its racialized imperial form, is integral to the work of international rule-of-law promotion. One consequence is the denial of “local” law by a rule of law that obtains its authority by purporting to be responsive to legal pluralism. But the Article also points to the mythological possibilities of decolonization, specifically the possibilities of a “mythological legal pluralism” that is attentive to the ways in which the world’s plurality of laws already rule.

2010 ◽  
Vol 79 (1) ◽  
pp. 113-140 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fredrik Stenhammar

AbstractThis article analyzes the judgment of the European Court of Justice in the Kadi and al-Barakaat case from the perspective of international law and the rule of law among nations. The conclusions drawn are with regard to international law and thus not necessarily decisive for the application of domestic law and Community law to the issue of targeted United Nations (UN) sanctions. It is argued that targeted UN sanctions in the form of blacklisting and freezing of financial assets are lawful under applicable international law as a species of economic warfare. Even if, contrary to expectation, they were unlawful when first introduced, consent and active participation on part of the European states mean that they are in all likelihood precluded from protesting against them now. The European Community Court's judgment cannot affect the validity under international law of targeted UN sanctions. If it turns out that the UN sanctions can no longer be accommodated within Community law, which is an implication but by no means an immediate result of the judgment, it will be for each state to apply its national legislation and continue to implement the sanctions, disregarding Community law if necessary. This would be a serious test of the European states' professed devotion to international law.


2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 277-332
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Bakibinga-Gaswaga

Abstract Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Development has brought the rule of law to the forefront in the quest for sustainable development, with emphasis on Africa and the rest of the developing world. To ensure that law contributes to sustainable development, it is critical to address the mismanagement of legal pluralism in Commonwealth member countries in Africa, demonstrated by the conflict of legal systems and the stagnant evolution of institutions of governance in the aftermath of independence after colonial rule, and the current neoliberal economics-oriented/institutional approach based on the Washington Consensus. The current approaches to rule of law reform and development have resulted in the status quo in Africa, where the role of law and legal systems for sustainable development is not explicitly evident. The law is not applied consciously for development and the role of legal practitioners in development is undermined. An understanding of the impact of colonialism and post-colonial legal systems and the impact of the Washington Consensus; the influence of intergovernmental organizations and international non-governmental actors in providing rule of law reform assistance; and the methodology through which the technical assistance for law and development has been implemented to date is critical to developing new methods/approaches to the rule of law and development.


1972 ◽  
Vol 66 (3) ◽  
pp. 491-508 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin B. Ferencz

It is seemingly easier to evoke aggression than to dispel it, and easier to commit aggression than to define it. What has been universally condemned as “the gravest of all crimes against peace and security throughout the world ” has yet to be consensually particularized. On the eve of its hundredth meeting, the U.N. Special Committee on the Question of Defining Aggression, the fourth United Nations body to deal with the topic since 1952, adjourned without having carried out its instructions. It did conclude by irresolute acclamation that progress had been made and that it should continue its work in 1973. Despite the semblance of unanimity, both points were not free from doubt. Defining aggression has perplexed legal scholars for nearly half a century. Those who are dedicated to the rule of law and to a rational system of conflict management may wish to consider some of the current disputations aS well as the expectations and requirements of the days or years to come.


Author(s):  
Nguyen Manh Hung

Trong khoảng 10 - 15 năm gần đây, ở Việt Nam đã nổi lên luận điểm rằng: cải cách thể chế kinh tế ngày càng đóng vai trò quan trọng hơn trong tiến trình đổi mới. Khi các nguồn lực như tài nguyên thiên nhiên, lao động giá rẻ và vốn...đã đến giới hạn thì cải cách thể chế trở thành đòi hỏi tất yếu đối với nền kinh tế. Tuy nhiên, đây cũng là thử thách khó khăn của quá trình phát triển. Trên thế giới, nhiều quốc gia chỉ đạt được một phần mục tiêu của cải cách, thậm chí ở một số quốc gia nỗ lực cải cách thể chế lại đẩy nền kinh tế vào những bất ổn không ngừng.  Tiến trình cải cách thể chế kinh tế sẽ khó thể thành công nếu không đi kèm với nỗ lực thiết lập một nền tảng quản trị quốc gia vững mạnh. Từ khóa Quản trị, thể chế, kinh tế thị trường, cải cách References [1] Acemoglu, Daron and James Robinson (2012). Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty. Random House[2] Acemoglu, Daron, Simon Johnson and James A. Robinson (2001), “The Colonial Origins of Comparative Development: An Empirical Investigation” The American Economic Review Vol. 91, No. 5 (Dec., 2001)[3] Acemoglu, Daron, Simon Johnson and James Robinson (2005). “Institutions as Fundamental Cause of Long run Growth”, Handbook ofEconomic Growth, Volume IA. Edited by Philippe Aghion and Steven N. Durlauf. 2005 Elsevier B.V[4] Asian Development Bank (1995). Governance: Sound Development Management, October 1995;[5] Diễn đàn kinh tế tư nhân Việt Nam 2016: Cơ hội, thách thức và giải pháp. Hà nội,[6] Heritage Foundation (2017). 2017 Index of Economic Freedom,[7] [http://www.heritage.org/index/ranking][8] International Development Association (1998). Additions to IDA Resources: Twelfth Replenishment (IDA12). 23 December 1998; [9] Kasper, Wolfgang and Manfred E Streit (1999). Institutional Economics: Social Order and Public Policy, Edward Elgar. Tr. 41[10] Kaufmann, Daniel; Aart Kraay, Massimo Mastruzzi (2010), The Worldwide Governance Indicators Methodology and Analytical Issues, the World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 5430, September 2010[11] Nguyễn Quang Thuấn (2017). “Cải thiện nền quản trị quốc gia, tạo môi trường thuận lợi thúc đẩy tăng trưởng kinh tế trong giai đoạn tới”, tham luận tại Diễn đàn Kinh tế Việt Nam 2017: Phát huy nội lực, tăng trưởng bền vững, Ban kinh tế trung ương ngày 27/06/2017[12] North, D.C. (1990), Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance, Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.[13] Osborne, S. P. (2006), “The New Public Governance?” Public Management Review, vol. 8, No. 3, pp. 377-388.[14] UNDP (1997). “Governance for Sustainable Human Development” New York; WB (1994). Governance: The World Bank’s Experience. Washington DC; [15] VCCI & USAID (2015). Báo cáo năng lực cạnh tranh cấp tỉnh năm 2015. Hà Nội: Phòng Thương mại và Công nghiệp Việt Nam và Cơ quan Phát triển Quốc tế Hoa Kỳ [16] Wolfensohn, James D. (1999), Address to the Board of Governors (September 28, 1999), the World Bank[17] WB (1992). World Development Report: Governance and Development, Washington DC. [18] WB (1989). Sub-Saharan Africa: From Crisis to Sustainable Growth, Washington DC[19] WB (2016). Ease of Doing Business 2016. Washington DC [20] http://www.doingbusiness.org/data/exploreeconomies/vietnam[21] WB (1997). World Development Report 1997. Washington DC. [22] WB (2017). Worldwide Governance Indicator, [23] http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/index.aspx#reports[24] World Economic Forum (2016). Global Competitiveness Report 2016-2017, Geneva.


2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-90
Author(s):  
KNUT TRAISBACH

AbstractBeyond setting the stage, the Introduction makes three claims about the conceptual triangle of the rule of law, judicial authority and legitimacy. The first is that all three are essentially contested and interpretive concepts in the sense of Walter B. Gallie and Ronald Dworkin. In their expositions, the contested and interpretative nature of such concepts is nothing to be ‘solved’, rather the formulation of different conceptions and contestation about them are central functions of such concepts. The interpretive and essentially contested nature points us to the relevant ‘actors’ and to conflicts and trade-offs between contested competencies. Thus the second point is that arguments about the rule of law and judicial legitimacy are often a means of questioning or securing the authority of a particular actor or institution in relation to other actors and institutions. The final point is that transposing concepts from the domestic to the supranational is a constructive endeavour because it entails creating new conceptions and substituting old ones as well as legitimising new authorities and delegitimising old ones. Thus, this special issue also cautions against discourses that ultimately are more about legitimation than about legitimacy and more about new ways of ruling than the rule of law.


Author(s):  
T. Romanova ◽  
E. Pavlova

The article examines how the normative power, which the EU puts forward as an ideological basis of its actions in the world, manifests itself in the national partnerships for modernization between Russia and EU member states. The authors demonstrate the influence of the EU’s normativity on its approach to modernization as well as the difference in the positions of its member countries. It is concluded that there is no unity in the EU’s approach to democracy, human rights and the rule of law, and the new classification of EU member states, which is based on their readiness to act in accordance with the Union’s concept of normative power, is offered.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document