Social justice jurisprudence of clinical education programme: A paradigm shift from legal education to justice education

The legal profession has remained relevant in bringing about positive transformation in society — with leaders, policymakers, and change makers around the world mostly possessing a background in the law. That said, the trust, and positive image, enjoyed by legal professionals continues on a declining path. Considered more glamorous, the legal profession has gone astray from the path of social justice. In this article, I argue that the negative perception of legal professionals is, in large part, because of the way legal professionals are taught and trained in law schools. I argue that legal teaching pedagogy in South Asia, and generally in developing countries, is a product of colonial structure. Even after the so-called decolonisation movement, law schools and universities, for example in South Asia, institutionalised a legal pedagogy unsuited to the epistemic actualities of their societies. A law student in South Asia was and continues to be taught the Western conception of what the law is and its relationship to justice. In a legal culture carrying the transplanted laws of the colonisers, the students of developing countries are meticulously trained in the technical skills of reasoning and interpretation by applying Eurocentric guidelines of positivist construction. In light of this, I propose a shift in legal education: to transform the existing legal education and pedagogy into ‘justice education’. I focus on the ancient principles — located in the Eastern legal philosophy — of empirical reasoning and the importance of the human nature of sociability in arriving at social justice. To combat the tendency of insulating law students from societal problems, I propose a social justice-driven legal pedagogy. I have also reflected on some practices that ‘are’ and highlighted other practices that ‘ought to be’. My thesis connotes that the legal profession has an innate role in building the capability of individuals who are deprived and excluded. In line with it, I present examples of scalable clinical legal education being practised specially by the Kathmandu School of Law that can create multidimensional legal professionalism.

     

当代法学教育的法理学透视

法学教育是高等教育的重要组成部分,它是以传授法律知识、训练法律思维、培养合格法律专业人才为内容的教育活动.①法学教育作为传承、创造人类法律文明的社会活动,是在社会的经济、政治、文化的共振下生成与进步的,也是在影响社会的进程中完善与发展的.因此,研究法学教育首先应把着眼点放置于法学教育与社会发展的宏观层面,从法学教育与人类发展的互动关系中探寻法学教育发展的规律,从而为当代法学教育模式的型塑提供理论动力.受法律事业本身属性的影响,法学教育与社会的政治、经济、文化、科技等诸多方面有着密切的联系.法学教育的水平、发展趋势是社会综合因素作用的结果.本文试图从法学教育与知识经济、法治建设、可持续发展、全球化等的互动影响中,探讨、研究法学教育发展的规律及未来走向.     

安乐死"合法性"的法理分析

安乐死“合法性”研究应是“合法化”研究的前导.否则后者很可能陷入盲目.从逻辑上说,“安乐死合法性”具有三种可能内涵：安乐死不违法;依法律施行安乐死;安乐死是一种权利.分析表明,第一种和第三种安乐死合法性尚不能被现代法权系统承认.各国安乐死立法主要体现了第二种安乐死合法性.第一种安乐死合法性容易被遗忘和忽视;第二种安乐死合法性目前遭到了广泛的误解;第三种安乐死合法性则是误解的产物并且超出了法律的维度.     

安乐死"合法性"的法理分析

安乐死“合法性”研究应是“合法化”研究的前导。否则后者很可能陷入盲目。从逻辑上说,“安乐死合法性”具有三种可能内涵:安乐死不违法;依法律施行安乐死;安乐死是一种权利。分析表明,第一种和第三种安乐死合法性尚不能被现代法权系统承认。各国安乐死立法主要体现了第二种安乐死合法性。第一种安乐死合法性容易被遗忘和忽视;第二种安乐死合法性目前遭到了广泛的误解;第三种安乐死合法性则是误解的产物并且超出了法律的维度。     

Explaining Capital Punishment Support in an Abolitionist Country: The Case of the Netherlands

A substantial minority (35%) of the Dutch population is in favor of capital punishment. In this paper, it is argued that in a staunchly abolitionist country such as The Netherlands, the existence and perseverance of such support can be better understood and explained by conceiving of capital punishment support in attitudinal terms as part of a law and order syndrome. Death penalty attitudes are analyzed by means of hierarchic logistic regression analysis. It is shown that support can be modeled quite well, partly in terms of general attitudes to criminal justice, partly in terms of political and sociodemographic parameters. Within the criminal justice attitudes complex, more support is found among those endorsing harsh treatment of offenders, those willing to grant far-reaching powers to justice authorities, those believing that the government is not delivering on the topic of crime fighting, and those who are concerned about the level of crime. Within the political context, more support is enlisted among people who abstain from voting and those who vote at either extreme of the political spectrum as opposed to central parties' supporters. In sociodemographic segments it is the younger and poorly educated who are the strongest supporters of capital punishment. It is suggested that endorsing capital punishment can be better understood as an expressive act, displaying dissatisfaction with judicial and political elites in the country.