A Norms Approach to Jury "Nullification:" Interests, Values, and Scripts

Juries and other lay tribunals are often justified because they leaven the law with community norms. Unfortunately, we do not have a particularly good theory of when and how juries substitute their normative judgments for the law. A first step in developing such a theory is to examine the nature of norms and the way jurors bring normative judgments to their task. In this article I compare and contrast different understandings of norms that currently are in vogue in the social sciences and then use these approaches to develop a more systematic understanding of when juries do and when they do not substitute their normative judgment for that of the law.     

Internal Market Rationality,Private Law and the Direction of the Union: Resuscitating the Market as the Object of the Political

This paper proposes a concept of ‘internal market rationality’ for the analysis of the political, legal and economic consequences of European integration. Internal market rationality refers to a specific pattern of political action in the field of internal market, which has emerged gradually due to the confluence of three main factors: first, the EU's functional institutional design; second, the processes of post‐national juridification; and third, a more contingent influence of ideas. In the interplay of those three factors, the interpretation of internal market has become overdetermined, restricting thereby the space of (democratic) politics in its regulation. This reification of internal market rationality has had a direct influence on the content of European law, as I demonstrate through the example of European private law. Internal market rationality has transformed the very concept of justice underpinning private law, the concept of the person or subject of law, the (re)distributive pattern of private law as well as the normative basis on which private law stands. I argue, finally, that a close examination of the legal, institutional and ideological arrangement behind internal market rationality provides clues for the democratisation of the EU.     

An Algebraic Analysis of Normative Systems

In the present paper we study how subsystems of a normative system can be combined, and the role of such combinations for the understanding of hypothetical legal consequences. A combination of two subsystems is often accomplished by a normative correlation or an intermediate concept. To obtain a detailed analysis of such phenomena we use an algebraic framework. Normative systems are represented as algebraic structures over sets of conditions. This representation makes it possible to study normative systems using an extension of the theory of Boolean algebras, called the theory of Boolean quasi-orderings.     

POLICE SUBCULTURE RECONSIDERED

Most comprehensive discussions of the police acknowledge the inability of legal and bureaucratic regulations to determine officer behavior. Attention is turned instead toward the informal norms developed within the police subculture. These discussions, however, tend to overstress the chasm between the formal and informal. They also provide inadequate tools for understanding differentiation, conflict, and change within police departments. I address these shortcomings here by mobilizing a particular conceptualization of the term "normative order"—as a set of rules and practices oriented around a central value. Six such orders are crucial to policing: law, bureaucratic control, adventure/machismo, safety, competence, and morality. I illustrate the importance of each by drawing upon ethnographic observations of the Los Angeles Police Department, and explain how my conceputalization offers a comprehensive yet flexible means to understand the social world of policing.     

规范性文件冲突及其在中国的治理

Regulatory instruments in the form of normative documents has been used as a way to modernize Chinese society since the late 1970s. However, the conflict between laws undermines the effectiveness of such efforts. This article aims to answer the following questions in the process of law-making: How serious is the conflict of normative documents in China? Why there exists the conflict of normative documents? How the Legislation Law approaches the conflict of normative documents? What to be done to prevent the conflict of normative documents?     

《民法典》背景下损害概念渊流论

《民法典》对侵害与损害的区分,给损害赔偿的体系带来了深远影响。如何理解损害的概念,是认识这一损害赔偿体系的基础。损害概念的发展历经差额假说、客观损害说及规范损害说的演变。差额假说在实践操作中具有便利性优势,且实质上是损害赔偿的填补功能及完全赔偿原则的规范表述,其作为通说的地位依然应当肯定。客观损害说及规范损害说的提出,...     

The European Social Contract and the European Public Sphere

Abstract:  The possible existence of a European democracy does not depend on the prerequisite of a homogeneous public sphere but on the understanding of the relationship between the normative basis of a European democracy—here a social contract—the structure of the European public sphere and the corresponding institutions. The normative concept of democracy as expressed in social contract theory is neither bound to the city-state nor the nation-state, but can be transferred to the European level. To realise the normative aims of the social contract the democratic institutions have to be—and were in the city—and the nation state—adapted to the structure of the respective public sphere. Two institutional characteristics of the democratic European polity could correspond to the heterogeneous European public sphere: (1) a cooperation of institutions with clearly separated and limited competences—contrary to the ideal-type sovereign institutions with broad competences in the nation-state, and (2) the policy field-oriented structure—contrary to the more uniform and functional structure of democratic institutions in the nation states.     

Beyond conception: legal determinations of filiation in the context of assisted reproductive technologies

This article argues that legal determinations of filiation are normative ideological constructions about how societal relations between parents and children should be ordered. They are based upon regular understandings of the relationship between biological and social facts and, as this article demonstrates, operate to create an asymmetrical relationship between the categories between paternity and maternity. I suggest that fairly recent developments in reproductive and genetic filiation have been made and offer the potential for an expanded understanding of relatedness or kinship which does not take the two-parent--one of each sex--model of the family as its normative form. While the examples I draw on arise in the context of reproductive technologies, I suggest that the analysis has broader implications for the recognition of broader family forms and relationship.     

Access to justice and human rights in Afghanistan

In anthropological and legal literature, the phenomenon termed ‘legal pluralism’ has been interpreted as a co-presence of legal orders which act in relation to their own ‘levels’ of referring ‘fields’. The Afghan normative network is generally described in terms of pluralism, where different normative systems such as customs, shari’a (Islamic law), state laws and principles deriving from international standard of law (e.g., human rights) coexist. In order to address the crucial question of access to justice, in this article, I stress the category of legal pluralism by introducing the hypothesis of an inaccessible normative pluralism as a key concept to capture the structural injustices of which Afghans are victims. Access to justice can be considered a foundational element of every legal project. Globally, the debates concerning the diffusion and application of human rights develop at the same time ideologically, politically, and pragmatically. Today in Afghanistan, these levels are expressed in all their complexity and ambivalence. It is therefore particularly significant to closely observe the work done by the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission and to discuss the issue of human rights by starting from a reflection on what might be defined a socio-normative condition of inaccessibility.     

Intracultural Awareness in Legal Language—Silvio Berlusconi’s Iconography of Law

Against the assumption that legal and normative systems are coextensive with geopolitical units and national spaces, the article advocates for the need to study how different legal and normative semiospheres, within the same geopolitical unit and national space, often give rise to ‘normolects’ that are transversal to socio-economic classes, ethnicities, and cultural lifestyles. The concept of legal and normative ‘imaginaries’ is useful to come to terms with the legal and normative semiotic ideology of such normolects, including their non-verbal dimension and legal-normative semiotic ideologies. More generally, the article prompts legal scholars, and particularly semioticians of law, not to focus exclusively on inter-cultural awareness in legal-normative language but to concentrate also on intra-cultural awareness. As a case study, the article analyses a drawing through which the former Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi visualized and advertised for a bill of reform of the Italian judicial system by his Minister of Justice, Angelino Alfano. The semiotic analysis of this visual artifact casts new light on the controversial political and judicial figure of Mr Berlusconi. The drawing is read as a visual embodiment of the conflict between two different legal and normative ideologies within the present-day Italian political and judicial arena. The paradoxes that underpin this iconography of law and mar a rational confrontation of legal-normative arguments in contemporary Italy are uncovered.     

盗窃罪中财产性利益占有的规范化解释进路

偷换二维码案的认定涉及诸多理论争议。通过对此类案件的构成要件定型分析可以发现,在涉事主体方面,行为人、商户、顾客三方关系是此类案件涉事主体的合理确定。无论是对于诈骗罪还是盗窃罪的行为定型方面,均存在难以解释的问题。特别是认为此类案件构成诈骗罪和新型三角诈骗的主张,在逻辑链条上无法有力地阐明其扩张解释的理由。对此,合理的解释路径是个别、例外地承认在此类涉及侵权行为以及民事请求权消灭的场合下,财产性利益的规范性占有的可能。这种规范化的理解虽然扩张了事实性的占有概念,但具有整体法秩序上的理由,并且符合刑法作为规范学的学科定位。与此同时,通过义务分配的功能性分析,也可以有效地区分不同情况,对于相关案件中的行为作出妥当的、符合罪刑法定原则要求以及司法实践需求的评价。     

Beyond Inclusive Legal Positivism*

In this essay, I characterize the original intervention that became Inclusive Legal Positivism, defend it against a range of powerful objections, explain its contribution to jurisprudence, and display its limitations and its modest jurisprudential significance. I also show how in its original formulations ILP depends on three notions that are either mistaken or inessential to law: the separability thesis, the rule of recognition, and the idea of criteria of legality. The first is false and is in event inessential to legal positivism. The second is inessential to legal positivism. The third is likely inessential to law. I then characterize the central claim of ILP in a way that relies on none of these: ILP is the claim that necessarily social facts determine the determinants of legal content. I show that ILP so conceived leaves the central debates in law largely untouched. I suggest how the most fundamental of these—the question of the normativity of law—at least can be usefully addressed. The essay closes by suggesting that even though one can distinguish the social from the normative dimensions of law, a theory of the nature of law is necessarily an account of the relationship between the two: It is a theory either of the difference that certain distinctive social facts make in normative space, or it is an account of the distinctive normative difference that law makes, and the social and other facts that are necessary to explain that difference. One can distinguish between but one cannot separate the social from the normative aspects of legality.     

Community Crime Prevention and the ‘Partnership Approach’: A Safe Community for Everyone?

If creating a safer community is merely reduced to controlling and disciplining the most vulnerable groups, their opportunities for participation and emancipation are blocked. Installing such a crime prevention model leads to the further exclusion of these groups. Starting from research that focuses on the interagency relationships within community crime prevention, this article offers a model of creating some possibilities to create a safer community on the one hand and that holds back the dynamics of social exclusion on the other. It focuses on the relations between (community oriented) welfare agencies on the one hand and police agencies on the other hand. Starting from the empirical data, two polarising models are put forward in order to analyse the evaluate this co-operation: a consensus model and a conflict model. Referring to a normative framework, it will be argued that a conflict model has to be preferred in order to develop a socially just crime prevention model.     

Eating Peas with One’s Fingers: A Semiotic Approach to Law and Social Norms

This paper proposes a semiotic theory of norms—what I term normative semiotics. The paper’s central contention is that social norms are a language. Moreover, it is a language that we instinctively learn to speak. Normative behaviour is a mode of communication, the intelligibility of which allows us to establish cooperative relationships with others. Normative behaviour communicates an actor’s potential as a cooperative partner. Compliance with a norm is an act of communication: compliance signals cooperativeness; noncompliance signals uncooperativeness. An evolutionary model is proposed to explain how this comes about: evolution has generated an instinctual proficiency in working with these signals much like a language—a proficiency that manifests in an emotional context. We see these social rules as possessing a certain ‘rightness’ in normative terms. This adaptive trait is what we call internalization. Internalization enhances the individual’s ability to speak this code. Because these signals communicate who is and who is not a reliable co-operator, sending and receiving cooperation signals is crucial to individual survival. Individuals who internalized the entire process and thus became more adept at speaking the language were at an advantage. Law seeks to shape the language of norms by maintaining the collective standards of society; as such, understanding how and why this normative language emerges is critical to understanding a core function of law.     

Self-Defense as Claim Right,Liberty, and Act-Specific Agent-Relative Prerogative

This paper is not so much concerned with the question under which circumstances self-defense is justified (I use the term self-defense to include other-defense), but rather with other normative features of self-defense as well as with the source of the self-defense justification. I will argue (as has been done before) that the aggressor’s rights-forfeiture alone – and hence the liberty-right of the defender to defend himself – cannot explain the intuitively obvious fact that a prohibition on self-defense would wrong victims of attack. This can only be explained by conceiving of self-defense also as a claim-right. However, I will also argue (more innovatively) that a claim-right cannot ground the self-defense justification either. Rather, what grounds the self-defense justification and its particular strength and scope is the fact that self-defense is an act-specific agent-relative prerogative: a defender is allowed to give particularly grave weight to his interest in engaging in self-defense, which distinguishes self-defense from most other acts. This is not the same as saying that he has a right or a liberty to engage in self-defense. Thus, self-defense, understood as a normative concept, is a claim-right, a liberty-right, and an act-specific agent-relative prerogative.     

EU Citizenship and Political Identity: The Demos and Telos Problems

Citizenship is the cornerstone of a democratic polity. It has three dimensions: legal, civic and affiliative. Citizens constitute the polity's demos, which often coincides with a nation. European Union (EU) citizenship was introduced to enhance ‘European identity’ (Europeans’ sense of belonging to their political community). Yet such citizenship faces at least two problems. First: Is there a European demos? If so, what is the status of peoples (nations, demoi) in the Member States? The original European project aimed at ‘an ever closer union among the peoples of Europe.’ Second: Citizens are members of a political community; to what kind of polity do EU citizens belong? Does the EU substitute Member States, assume them or coexist alongside them? After an analytical exposition of the demos and telos problems, I will argue for a normative self‐understanding of the EU polity and citizenship, neither in national nor in federal but in analogical terms.     

新时代法理：从冲突走向合作——建立法理型社会的法律社会学思考

以法律社会学的三大研究范式即功能主义、自由多元主义和马克思主义的社会观-国家观-法律观之间的主要差异——合作、竞争和冲突——为立论基础,论证了当代中国由马克思主义的冲突观转向功能主义的合作观的必需。依据这种＂从冲突走向合作＂的新时代法理,结合当代中国国家治理的六个基本法律问题,阐述了如何在关键转型上遵循新法律理性,从基调伦理与宪政改革上建立法理型社会秩序。