国家法与法律多元化:走向评析

IF 0.6 Q2 Social Sciences

Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law Pub Date : 2020-01-02 DOI:10.1080/07329113.2020.1727726

Hanisah Binte Abdullah Sani

{"title":"国家法与法律多元化:走向评析","authors":"Hanisah Binte Abdullah Sani","doi":"10.1080/07329113.2020.1727726","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Is plurality within state law a case of legal pluralism? The traditional canon on legal pluralism cannot come to a consensus on the matter. Those who do not consider plurality within state law a case of legal pluralism argue that it yet privileges an ideology of legal centralism. This formalist and positivist legal theory is anathema to a realist conception of the law that privileges law’s complex social orderings beyond the state. This controversy has produced an analytical stalemate in the field and obscured our understanding of plural legal systems – a ubiquitous feature of legal administration across the world. Reviewing extant scholarship, this paper argues that literature on legal pluralism need to be more critical of the state and to develop an explicit legal theory of political process. This challenges the Austinian notion that state law is derived from an ultimate sovereign and to reveal how state law is a site of intense competition among multiple power brokers.","PeriodicalId":44432,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"State law and legal pluralism: towards an appraisal\",\"authors\":\"Hanisah Binte Abdullah Sani\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/07329113.2020.1727726\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Is plurality within state law a case of legal pluralism? The traditional canon on legal pluralism cannot come to a consensus on the matter. Those who do not consider plurality within state law a case of legal pluralism argue that it yet privileges an ideology of legal centralism. This formalist and positivist legal theory is anathema to a realist conception of the law that privileges law’s complex social orderings beyond the state. This controversy has produced an analytical stalemate in the field and obscured our understanding of plural legal systems – a ubiquitous feature of legal administration across the world. Reviewing extant scholarship, this paper argues that literature on legal pluralism need to be more critical of the state and to develop an explicit legal theory of political process. This challenges the Austinian notion that state law is derived from an ultimate sovereign and to reveal how state law is a site of intense competition among multiple power brokers.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44432,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/07329113.2020.1727726\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07329113.2020.1727726","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: 8

摘要

州法多元性是法律多元性的一种情况吗?关于法律多元化的传统经典在这个问题上无法达成共识。那些不认为州法多元性是法律多元性的人认为，这是一种法律集中制的意识形态。这种形式主义和实证主义的法律理论是对现实主义法律观念的诅咒，这种观念认为法律的复杂社会秩序超越了国家。这一争议在该领域造成了分析上的僵局，并模糊了我们对多元法律体系的理解，而多元法律体系是世界各地法律行政的普遍特征。回顾现有的学术研究，本文认为关于法律多元主义的文献需要对国家进行更多的批判，并发展一种明确的政治过程的法律理论。这挑战了奥斯丁的观点，即国家法律源于最终的主权，并揭示了国家法律是如何成为多个权力经纪人之间激烈竞争的场所。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

State law and legal pluralism: towards an appraisal

Abstract Is plurality within state law a case of legal pluralism? The traditional canon on legal pluralism cannot come to a consensus on the matter. Those who do not consider plurality within state law a case of legal pluralism argue that it yet privileges an ideology of legal centralism. This formalist and positivist legal theory is anathema to a realist conception of the law that privileges law’s complex social orderings beyond the state. This controversy has produced an analytical stalemate in the field and obscured our understanding of plural legal systems – a ubiquitous feature of legal administration across the world. Reviewing extant scholarship, this paper argues that literature on legal pluralism need to be more critical of the state and to develop an explicit legal theory of political process. This challenges the Austinian notion that state law is derived from an ultimate sovereign and to reveal how state law is a site of intense competition among multiple power brokers.

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

Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law LAW-

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： As the pioneering journal in this field The Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law (JLP) has a long history of publishing leading scholarship in the area of legal anthropology and legal pluralism and is the only international journal dedicated to the analysis of legal pluralism. It is a refereed scholarly journal with a genuinely global reach, publishing both empirical and theoretical contributions from a variety of disciplines, including (but not restricted to) Anthropology, Legal Studies, Development Studies and interdisciplinary studies. The JLP is devoted to scholarly writing and works that further current debates in the field of legal pluralism and to disseminating new and emerging findings from fieldwork. The Journal welcomes papers that make original contributions to understanding any aspect of legal pluralism and unofficial law, anywhere in the world, both in historic and contemporary contexts. We invite high-quality, original submissions that engage with this purpose.