“没有时间做出改变”?法律改革修辞学述评

IF 1.4 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW
James Lee
{"title":"“没有时间做出改变”?法律改革修辞学述评","authors":"James Lee","doi":"10.1093/clp/cuad004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n How do we talk about changing the law? This article considers the rhetoric of law reform and what it can tell us about the current relationships between key institutions involved in the relevant processes. A key claim is that the rhetoric deployed in formulating proposals can complicate the fate of law reform projects as they develop. Several examples from private and criminal law are used to support the argument, with assessment of the interaction of time and legal development. The language of ‘modernisation’—a noticeable theme in contemporary proposals from the Law Commission of England and Wales—is scrutinised. The Commission’s statutory functions expressly include ‘the repeal of obsolete and unnecessary enactments… and generally the simplification and modernisation of the law’, but what ‘modernisation’ means in this area has, so far, been under-examined. The author then goes on to identify attitudinal and structural tensions in the current relationship between the Law Commission and Government. Constructive suggestions are offered for reforming our law reform practices. The way in which we talk about law reform can be understood as both a cause and symptom of some of the problems in developing the law today.","PeriodicalId":45282,"journal":{"name":"Current Legal Problems","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"‘Not Time to Make a Change’? Reviewing the Rhetoric of Law Reform\",\"authors\":\"James Lee\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/clp/cuad004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n How do we talk about changing the law? This article considers the rhetoric of law reform and what it can tell us about the current relationships between key institutions involved in the relevant processes. A key claim is that the rhetoric deployed in formulating proposals can complicate the fate of law reform projects as they develop. Several examples from private and criminal law are used to support the argument, with assessment of the interaction of time and legal development. The language of ‘modernisation’—a noticeable theme in contemporary proposals from the Law Commission of England and Wales—is scrutinised. The Commission’s statutory functions expressly include ‘the repeal of obsolete and unnecessary enactments… and generally the simplification and modernisation of the law’, but what ‘modernisation’ means in this area has, so far, been under-examined. The author then goes on to identify attitudinal and structural tensions in the current relationship between the Law Commission and Government. Constructive suggestions are offered for reforming our law reform practices. The way in which we talk about law reform can be understood as both a cause and symptom of some of the problems in developing the law today.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45282,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current Legal Problems\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current Legal Problems\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/clp/cuad004\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Legal Problems","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/clp/cuad004","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

我们怎么谈论修改法律?本文考虑了法律改革的修辞,以及它可以告诉我们的有关相关过程中涉及的关键机构之间的当前关系。一个关键的主张是,在制定提案时使用的修辞可能会使法律改革项目的命运随着它们的发展而复杂化。从私法和刑法的几个例子来支持这一论点,并评估了时间和法律发展的相互作用。“现代化”一词——英格兰和威尔士法律委员会当代提案中引人注目的主题——被仔细审查。委员会的法定职能明确包括“废除过时和不必要的法令……以及一般的法律简化和现代化”,但到目前为止,“现代化”在这方面的含义尚未得到充分研究。作者接着指出法律委员会和政府之间目前关系中态度和结构上的紧张关系。对改革我国法律改革实践提出了建设性意见。我们谈论法律改革的方式可以被理解为当今法律发展中一些问题的原因和症状。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
‘Not Time to Make a Change’? Reviewing the Rhetoric of Law Reform
How do we talk about changing the law? This article considers the rhetoric of law reform and what it can tell us about the current relationships between key institutions involved in the relevant processes. A key claim is that the rhetoric deployed in formulating proposals can complicate the fate of law reform projects as they develop. Several examples from private and criminal law are used to support the argument, with assessment of the interaction of time and legal development. The language of ‘modernisation’—a noticeable theme in contemporary proposals from the Law Commission of England and Wales—is scrutinised. The Commission’s statutory functions expressly include ‘the repeal of obsolete and unnecessary enactments… and generally the simplification and modernisation of the law’, but what ‘modernisation’ means in this area has, so far, been under-examined. The author then goes on to identify attitudinal and structural tensions in the current relationship between the Law Commission and Government. Constructive suggestions are offered for reforming our law reform practices. The way in which we talk about law reform can be understood as both a cause and symptom of some of the problems in developing the law today.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
期刊介绍: The lectures are public, delivered on a weekly basis and chaired by members of the judiciary. CLP features scholarly articles that offer a critical analysis of important current legal issues. It covers all areas of legal scholarship and features a wide range of methodological approaches to law.
×
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