The Common Law (And Not Roman) Origins of Amicus Curiae in International Law – Debunking a Fake News Item

Q2 Social Sciences
Global Jurist Pub Date : 2019-12-18 DOI:10.1515/gj-2019-0038
L. Crema
{"title":"The Common Law (And Not Roman) Origins of Amicus Curiae in International Law – Debunking a Fake News Item","authors":"L. Crema","doi":"10.1515/gj-2019-0038","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The possibility for private entities interested in international trials but without the legal requirements to participate as a party was precluded, in a classical vision of international law made for states and addressed to states. At present, however, with some notable exceptions, several international jurisdictions allow for the submission of amicus curiae briefs. These briefs were introduced to international courts by common law lawyers. Legal literature generally identifies it as an institution of classical Roman law. This paper will show that this assumption is, however, doubtful. An examination of the sources cited by an important dictionary and other decades-old legal scholarship relied upon today as establishing the Roman origins of amicus curiae, and a fresh study of Roman and later continental European primary sources reveal a different picture: in reality, there is neither a basis for grounding the amicus curiae in Roman law, nor is there a basis for grounding it in the medieval continental ius commune. The primary source is most likely English common law and, not surprisingly, it was common law lawyers who introduced the briefs into international litigation.","PeriodicalId":34941,"journal":{"name":"Global Jurist","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/gj-2019-0038","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Jurist","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/gj-2019-0038","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract The possibility for private entities interested in international trials but without the legal requirements to participate as a party was precluded, in a classical vision of international law made for states and addressed to states. At present, however, with some notable exceptions, several international jurisdictions allow for the submission of amicus curiae briefs. These briefs were introduced to international courts by common law lawyers. Legal literature generally identifies it as an institution of classical Roman law. This paper will show that this assumption is, however, doubtful. An examination of the sources cited by an important dictionary and other decades-old legal scholarship relied upon today as establishing the Roman origins of amicus curiae, and a fresh study of Roman and later continental European primary sources reveal a different picture: in reality, there is neither a basis for grounding the amicus curiae in Roman law, nor is there a basis for grounding it in the medieval continental ius commune. The primary source is most likely English common law and, not surprisingly, it was common law lawyers who introduced the briefs into international litigation.
国际法中法庭之友的普通法(而非罗马法)渊源——揭露虚假新闻
摘要对国际审判感兴趣但没有法律要求的私人实体作为当事方参与的可能性被排除在为国家制定并针对国家的国际法的经典视野中。然而,目前,除了一些明显的例外,一些国际法域允许提交法庭之友案情摘要。普通法律师向国际法院介绍了这些案情摘要。法律文献通常认为它是罗马古典法律的一种制度。然而,本文将表明这一假设是值得怀疑的。对一本重要词典和其他几十年前的法律学术所引用的资料来源的审查,以及对罗马和后来的欧洲大陆主要资料来源的新研究,揭示了一幅不同的画面:事实上,既没有将法庭之友作为罗马法的基础,也没有一个基础,在中世纪的大陆ius公社。主要来源很可能是英国普通法,毫不奇怪,正是普通法律师将案情摘要引入了国际诉讼。
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
Global Jurist
Global Jurist Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
期刊介绍: Global Jurist offers a forum for scholarly cyber-debate on issues of comparative law, law and economics, international law, law and society, and legal anthropology. Edited by an international board of leading comparative law scholars from all the continents, Global Jurist is mindful of globalization and respectful of cultural differences. We will develop a truly international community of legal scholars where linguistic and cultural barriers are overcome and legal issues are finally discussed outside of the narrow limits imposed by positivism, parochialism, ethnocentrism, imperialism and chauvinism in the law. Submission is welcome from all over the world and particularly encouraged from the Global South.
×
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