The Continuing Relevance of Ars Poetica to Legal Scholarship and the Modern Lawyer

In this late modern era within which the basic values of life have been reordered (driven by globalisation, the corporate agenda and mass communication technologies), the individual has effectively been reduced to a mere abstraction. It might be argued that the rational, moral and humanistic concept of freedom has, to a great extent, been compromised by a consequent crisis within the intelligentsia. These groups, in particular the gatekeepers of a classical liberal approach to legal scholarship, are caught between the twin evils of increased unreflective populism and pragmatism evident within many law schools and modern legal institutions. Although a contested term, defenders of the ‘socio-legal’ tradition, who place the humanities at the heart of legal research and education, are obliged to restate with increased determination the utility of the liberal arts and literature to the law profession and wider legal community. In a normative environment, law and narrative are inextricably linked and narrative poetry is not only invaluable to explaining the origins and location of the legal tradition, but also elicits a mode of understanding which transcends the boundaries of narrowlydefined legal hermeneutics—which often only addresses issues of an operational nature. French novelist Flaubert claimed “chaque notaire porte en soi les débris d’un poète” (Flaubert in Madame bovary (trans: Wall, G.), Penguin Classics, London, 1960: 269), paraphrased by American civil rights lawyer, Clarence Darrow, as “inside every lawyer is the wreck of a poet” (Lukas in Big trouble: a murder in a small western town sets off a struggle for the soul of America, Simon & Schuster, New York, 1997: 323). In an age of disenchantment, this paper explores the poetic form as an important medium within which to understand the nature and function of law in a society of differentiated individuals.     

Neonaticides in Hamburg, Germany, from 1998 to 2008

In the analyzed period from 1998 to 2008, the autopsies performed at the Hamburg Institute of Legal Medicine included 13 cases in which an investigation for neonaticide had been initiated by the public prosecutor. The killed neonates showed a nearly equal distribution between both sexes. The most common method of neonaticide was suffocation. Most of the perpetrators were young, unmarried primipara with an average educational background. Almost all of them were suffering under psychological stress and had negated their pregnancy. In most cases, birth and neonaticide happened alone in their flat, and there was no medical attendance in any case. In the cases brought to court the women were charged with manslaughter (Section 212 German Criminal Code) and those found guilty were always granted a mitigated sentence pursuant to Section 213 Criminal Code.     

STAR METRICS and the Science of Science Policy

STAR METRICS is a data platform that is being voluntarily and collaboratively developed by U.S. federal science agencies and research institutions to describe investments in science and their results. It initially emerged as a result of reporting requirements associated with the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act; it has developed in response to a recognized need to begin to systematically document federal investments in science and their immediate and long‐term results. The eventual goal is to draw information from existing data on scientific and economic activities as well as from research institutions' and federal science agencies' systems to provide data that can be used for a more scientific analysis of science investments and their outcomes.     

When risk‐based regulation aims low: Approaches and challenges

Risk‐based regulation is becoming a familiar regulatory strategy in a wide range of areas and countries. Regulatory attention tends to focus, at least initially, on high risks but low‐risk regulatees or activities tend to form the bulk of the regulated population. This article asks why regulators need to address low risks and it outlines the potential difficulties that such risks present. It then considers how regulators tend to deal with lower risks in practice. A body of literature and survey‐based research is used to develop a taxonomy of intervention strategies that may be useful in relation to low‐risk activities, and, indeed, more widely. In an article to be published in the subsequent issue of this journal, we will then develop a strategic framework for regulators to employ when choosing intervention strategies and we will assesses whether, and how, such a framework could be used by regulatory agencies in a manner that is operable, dynamic, transparent, and justifiable.     

Paradoxes and Failures: ‘New Governance’ Techniques and the Financial Crisis

This article examines the performance of four ‘new governance’ techniques of regulation in the period leading up to the financial crisis: principles based regulation, risk based regulation, meta‐regulation and enrolment. These techniques have been advocated on the basis that they are responsive, flexible, and in enrolling others in the regulatory project thereby expand its capacity, and even its legitimacy. However, experience in the crisis revealed that in their implementation they can be out of touch or indulgent, focus heavily on auditable systems and processes, and that in enrolling others they can increase vulnerabilities and the potential for negative endogenous effects. The argument is not that there should be a return to adversarial ‘command and control’ regulation, rather that experience of these strategies in the crisis suggests a need to understand in greater depth the refractive effects of the organisational, technical/functional and cognitive dimensions of regulatory governance, if we are to understand and adapt its performance in different contexts.     

Is it Time to Cut the Gordian Knot of Polar Sovereignty?

There has been recent discussion on the abandonment of sovereignty in the Arctic and territorial and marine claims in Antarctica in the interests of redefining these regions into global commons with joint management. Global commons refers to a region, or group of valued resources, protected from exploitation in the interests of the global population and future generations. While it may be reasonable to examine the possibility of shifting sovereignty in these regions and locking access to any of the resources, an academic examination must not focus on sovereignty in isolation from existing management regimes. Sovereignty is not displaced easily, and nor are sovereign rights; however there is a large capacity for negotiation, consent and agreement towards how resources and areas may be used and enjoyed while maintaining an indifference to existing or exerted territorial and/or marine claims. Sovereignty and sovereign rights can also be preserved, but their utility minimized in the presence of alternative arrangements, as exemplified in the Antarctic Treaty. In the absence of such arrangements, the self-interest of States is manifest. A false sense of probability is fostered by any examination that only considers sovereignty and disregards State practice or current management initiatives. This article demonstrates that the current governance arrangements are legitimate in a dynamic world, regardless of sovereignty, and identifies the lengths to which the stakeholders go to preserve both their national interest and that of the global community in de facto global commons areas. It concludes by offering a view that cutting the Gordian knot of polar sovereignty is both risky and premature in the absence of suitable alternatives.     

Against Myths and Traditions that Emasculate Women: Language,Literature, Law and Female Empowerment

Western literature has traditionally presented women as either passive or ultimately unhappy heroines, for example Anna Karenina, Hedda Gabler and Emma Bovary (Tolstoy in Anna Karenina, Penguin Classics, UK, 2003; Ibsen in Hedda Gabler, Nick Hern Books, UK, 1995; Flaubert in Madame Bovary, Penguin Classics, UK, 2003). Their relationships with men tend to range from deficient to hopeless, as interaction with the other often produces endless struggle and sacrifice, against the possibility of self-determination and personal fulfilment. Religious doctrine is also replete with images of heroic women dogged by an unhappy fate or the passive obedient woman condemned to a life of servitude. These tales of female subservience logically lead to the idea that for a woman, individual freedom depends on the avoidance of commitment and intimacy; as attachment becomes synonymous with enslavement and so freedom is only possible in isolation. This presumption does not hold true for same-sex lesbian relationships, only those entanglements involving males where the union serves to project largely male interests. Even though the evolution of modern law is mostly subject to social forces rather than religious considerations and the last century evidenced the emergence of many new hard won women’s rights, the male perspective still constitutes the benchmark against which others are measured. It is suggested that society, whilst cleverly concealing any bias beneath empowerment speech, continually seeks legitimacy for new forms of control over the bodies and behaviour of women. This paper examines the current axiomatically given gendered representations of women and demands transparency in the processes which too often fail to accord women the right to equal standing and equitable treatment.