The Rule of Law Under Extreme Conditions and International Law: A Law and Economics Perspective

E. Salzberger
{"title":"The Rule of Law Under Extreme Conditions and International Law: A Law and Economics Perspective","authors":"E. Salzberger","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2508846","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The ‘rule of law’ has attracted a lot of scholarly writings as well as political and public rhetoric in recent years. On the one hand, scholars found that adherence to the rule of law can be regarded as the most significant explanatory factor for various measures of a country’s success, both in social - quality of life - realm and in the pure economic realm. On the other hand, various governments’ responses to terror threats since 9/11, including responses of established liberal democracies, brought about a surge in positive and normative writings, as well as public debates, about the rule of law under extreme conditions or the deviations from the rule of law, even by the most liberal democracies. However, the international law aspects regarding the rule of law under extreme conditions is a field that had received almost no attention so far. Discussing the rule of law under extreme conditions in the international arena from a Law and Economics perspective raises several challenges. First, although the concept of the rule of law as an ingredient of the ‘good’ state, is established (although its precise definition is not agreed upon), the basic definition of the rule of law in the international arena is a much more virgin field. Second, Extreme conditions may challenge the normative and positive analysis of the rule of law. The theory of the state from which we derive the common understanding of the principle of the rule of law deals with the regular operation of collective life, institutions and decision-making. Under extreme conditions most countries establish a different form of the rule of law (an emergency constitution, as phrased by some), compromising some of its essentials during regular times. It can be argued on the normative level that this is justifiable; but to what extent and in which format? There is no coherent paradigm yet for the analysis of the desirable as well as the de-facto rule of law “balance” (e.g. state security versus human rights) under extreme conditions. The third major challenge relates to the definition of those extreme conditions that merit a special look vis-a-vis the rule of law. Three types of extreme conditions have been discussed by the literature: (1) belligerency, war, terror and alike; (2) natural and man-made disasters; and (3) political or economic meltdowns. Are extreme conditions in the international arena identical to extreme conditions in the context of the state? Is the familiar distinction between the three types of extreme conditions referred to in the context of the state applicable to the international sphere?I will try to contribute a few preliminary thoughts about each of these challenges, highlighting the perspective of Law and Economics. Section 1 will explore the concept of the rule of law in the international arena and in international law; Section 2 will elaborate on the economic philosophical foundations of the theory of the state and will examine their applicability to the international sphere and to extreme conditions; Section 3 will focus on the characterization of extreme conditions vis-a-vis the rule of law, including a short overview of the models put forward in the literature and also some methodological remarks for those who engage with a Law and Economics approach towards this topic.","PeriodicalId":181409,"journal":{"name":"LSN: Other Public International Law: Human Rights (Topic)","volume":"43 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LSN: Other Public International Law: Human Rights (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2508846","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The ‘rule of law’ has attracted a lot of scholarly writings as well as political and public rhetoric in recent years. On the one hand, scholars found that adherence to the rule of law can be regarded as the most significant explanatory factor for various measures of a country’s success, both in social - quality of life - realm and in the pure economic realm. On the other hand, various governments’ responses to terror threats since 9/11, including responses of established liberal democracies, brought about a surge in positive and normative writings, as well as public debates, about the rule of law under extreme conditions or the deviations from the rule of law, even by the most liberal democracies. However, the international law aspects regarding the rule of law under extreme conditions is a field that had received almost no attention so far. Discussing the rule of law under extreme conditions in the international arena from a Law and Economics perspective raises several challenges. First, although the concept of the rule of law as an ingredient of the ‘good’ state, is established (although its precise definition is not agreed upon), the basic definition of the rule of law in the international arena is a much more virgin field. Second, Extreme conditions may challenge the normative and positive analysis of the rule of law. The theory of the state from which we derive the common understanding of the principle of the rule of law deals with the regular operation of collective life, institutions and decision-making. Under extreme conditions most countries establish a different form of the rule of law (an emergency constitution, as phrased by some), compromising some of its essentials during regular times. It can be argued on the normative level that this is justifiable; but to what extent and in which format? There is no coherent paradigm yet for the analysis of the desirable as well as the de-facto rule of law “balance” (e.g. state security versus human rights) under extreme conditions. The third major challenge relates to the definition of those extreme conditions that merit a special look vis-a-vis the rule of law. Three types of extreme conditions have been discussed by the literature: (1) belligerency, war, terror and alike; (2) natural and man-made disasters; and (3) political or economic meltdowns. Are extreme conditions in the international arena identical to extreme conditions in the context of the state? Is the familiar distinction between the three types of extreme conditions referred to in the context of the state applicable to the international sphere?I will try to contribute a few preliminary thoughts about each of these challenges, highlighting the perspective of Law and Economics. Section 1 will explore the concept of the rule of law in the international arena and in international law; Section 2 will elaborate on the economic philosophical foundations of the theory of the state and will examine their applicability to the international sphere and to extreme conditions; Section 3 will focus on the characterization of extreme conditions vis-a-vis the rule of law, including a short overview of the models put forward in the literature and also some methodological remarks for those who engage with a Law and Economics approach towards this topic.
极端条件下的法治与国际法:法学与经济学视角
近年来,“法治”一词吸引了大量的学术著作以及政治和公共言论。一方面,学者们发现,无论是在社会生活质量领域还是在纯经济领域,坚持法治都可以被视为衡量一个国家成功的各种指标中最重要的解释因素。另一方面,自9/11以来,各国政府对恐怖威胁的反应,包括已建立的自由民主国家的反应,带来了关于极端条件下法治或偏离法治的积极和规范的著作以及公开辩论的激增,即使是在最自由的民主国家。然而,关于极端条件下的法治的国际法方面是一个迄今几乎没有受到注意的领域。从法律和经济学的角度讨论国际舞台上极端条件下的法治提出了几个挑战。首先,虽然法治作为“好”国家的一个组成部分的概念已经确立(尽管其精确定义尚未达成一致),但在国际舞台上,法治的基本定义是一个更加处女地。其次,极端条件可能会挑战法治的规范性和实证分析。我们对法治原则的共同理解来源于国家理论,它涉及集体生活、制度和决策的正常运作。在极端条件下,大多数国家建立了一种不同形式的法治(一些国家称之为紧急宪法),在正常时期损害了法治的一些基本要素。在规范层面上,我们可以认为这是合理的;但在何种程度上,以何种形式?对于在极端条件下理想的以及事实上的法治“平衡”(例如国家安全与人权)的分析,目前还没有连贯的范式。第三个主要挑战是如何界定那些值得对法治进行特别关注的极端情况。文献讨论了三种类型的极端条件:(1)交战、战争、恐怖等;(二)天灾人祸;(3)政治或经济崩溃。国际舞台上的极端情况与国内的极端情况相同吗?在国家范围内提及的三种极端情况之间的熟悉区别是否适用于国际领域?我将尝试对这些挑战提出一些初步的想法,强调法律和经济学的观点。第1节将探讨国际舞台和国际法中的法治概念;第2节将详细阐述国家理论的经济哲学基础,并考察其在国际领域和极端条件下的适用性;第3节将重点介绍与法治相关的极端条件的特征,包括对文献中提出的模型的简要概述,以及对那些使用法律和经济学方法研究该主题的人的一些方法论评论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信