A Separate Peace? The Politics of Localized Law in the Post‐Revolutionary Era

Law is often seen as peripheral to Southern life before the Civil War, and the South as an outlier in the American legal history of that era. In The People and Their Peace (2009), Laura Edwards demonstrates the profoundly legal nature of Southern society and takes an important step toward integrating the legal history of the South with that of the nation. Edwards identifies two dueling legal cultures in North and South Carolina between 1787 and 1840—the law of local courts, which she terms localized law, and the state law of professionalized lawyers and reformers. She argues that white women, slaves, and the poor fared better in localized law—which was based on notions of popular sovereignty and the flexible rubric of restoring “the peace”—than in state courts, which were steeped in a national culture of individual rights that led to more restrictive results. This essay questions Edwards's dichotomy between local law and state law and her depiction of the popular content of localized law, while building on Edwards's innovations to suggest a new direction for Southern legal history.     

The Israeli Patient's Rights Law: evidence for deprofessionalization?

In this paper, the Israeli Patient's Rights Law of 1996 is discussed within the framework of Haug's predicted process of deprofessionalization. It is argued that the law reflects global processes such as the diffusion of knowledge, consumerism, and values that emphasize human rights and democracy. By guaranteeing patients' access to medical information, by submitting medical decisions to extra-professional regulation, the law erodes professional power.     

Do Victims of War Need International Law? Human Rights Education Programs in Authoritarian Sudan

Drawing on ethnographic fieldwork in Sudan, this article illuminates the consequences of human rights educational workshops as a form of humanitarian assistance in war‐ravaged areas. These projects are built on flawed assumptions about Sudanese politics and about the likelihood that human rights education empowers the war‐ravaged poor. The beneficial impacts of human rights discourse stem from its side effects, which fulfill urgent and symbolic needs, and not from the core content of human rights. The case of an authoritarian regime exposes an alternative site of rights promotion, outside the established or struggling democracies where most literature on rights resides. Bridging the literature on rights in Western, democratic contexts and on human rights in Africa, this article argues that law is not enough—and is potentially dangerous—in the insecure and impoverished areas where the international aid community has been encouraging it to flourish.     

Where is Latisha’s Law? Black Invisibility in the Social Construction of Victimhood

Laws named after specific crime victims have become increasingly common. These laws are part of a broader effort to downgrade the status and rehabilitative needs of offenders and to hear the voices and trumpet the legitimate concerns of victims—often as a means of justifying punitive crime control policies. Beyond the substantive merit of individual statutes, collectively these named laws provide a clear image of which victims warrant protection and memorialization: Victims who are vulnerable in some way, who are pursued by predatory criminals into their otherwise safe domains, and—above all—who are White. In this regard, an analysis of 51 named laws from 1990 to 2016 reveals that the vast majority of them (86.3%) honor White victims. In asking the question, “Where is Latisha’s Law?,” we seek to illuminate the virtual invisibility of African American victims and the implicit social construction of which lives matter more in American society.     

“Error But Without Malice” in Defamation of Public Officials: The Value of Free Expression in International Human Rights Law

Government officials in various parts of the world use defamation to silence critics, but defamation liability may curtail freedom of expression on topics of public interest and undermine human rights generally. Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights guarantees freedom of expression unless a state can show need to protect individual reputation and acts proportionally. In its adjudication of complaints for violations of Article 19, and in its General Comment 34, the United Nations Human Rights Committee has crafted the principle that defamation liability may not be imposed if an erroneous statement about a public official was made in “error but without malice.” Although soft law, General Comment 34 represents the committee's most compelling articulation of the values animating freedom of expression in international human rights law, and chief among the values is the role played by free expression to promote realization of all human rights.     

Law Enforcement and the Rights of the Accused: Are the Police Getting a Bad Rap?

Nationwide, law enforcement professionals have endured increasing scrutiny regarding their treatment of custodial suspects and their alleged abridgement of suspects’ Constitutional rights. At the same time, in the interests of community safety, many members of the public fully expect police officers to function efficiently in arresting and facilitating the prosecution of likely perpetrators. These perspectives reflect due-process and crime-control models respectively. Very little is known, however, about how law enforcement professionals actually view the rights of the accused when not acutely immersed in the cross-currents of public opinion. Using an anonymous survey, the current investigation addresses both Miranda rights as well as the European Union’s (EU) much more comprehensive approach to the rights of the accused. In general, this sample of 209 urban police officers favored protections of criminal suspects that went considerably beyond Miranda safeguards.     

Award for The Best Proposal Outlining a Program of Research in Jurimetrics—The Scientific Study of Law

Law and Human Behavior -     

The Advent of Preventive Criminal Law: An Erosion of the Traditional Criminal Law?

Criminal law in contemporary societies is undergoing a transformation or according to some, even a paradigm shift. The reach of criminal law is now extended to terrains that were hitherto immune to criminalization. These new forms of criminalization. in post-heroic risk societies are targeting conduct well before it causes a harm. The prime examples of this preventive criminalization. are pre-inchoate offences, crimes of possession of “innocent” objects and crimes of abstract endangerment. The common trait of these offences is that they enable the so-called preponing criminal liability (Vorverlagerung), through which the earliest of preparatory acts, neutral, everyday activities such as merely standing around or merely possessing may well fall within the reach of criminal law. This phenomenon is now taking place virtually everywhere considered by many as an erosion of the traditional post-enlightenment criminal law model. Yet, proponents of the preventive criminal law are suggesting that such laws are needed in order to avert risks (terrorist attacks, for instance) while they are at preparation phase. There is, therefore, a tension between the traditional criminal law and new security interests that pose new questions which need to be addressed by a meticulous analysis. In this article I shall try to deal with following questions: Whether these preventive offences are inherently incompatible with the rule of law? How far a law-abiding nation can go in criminalizing preparatory acts? Are there any promising constraining constitutional principles or instances that delimit preventive criminalization?     

The Crisis of International Criminal Law in Africa: A Regional Regime in Response?

Netherlands International Law Review - This article considers the African Union’s (AU) proposal for a regional court for international crimes under the Malabo Protocol 2014 (Protocol). It...     

Beyond the Law?: The Justice of Deconstruction

This paper offers a close reading of Derridas essay Force of Law that emphasises the twin strengths of a deconstructive approach to questions of law and justice -- textual analysis and political context. Derridas interest is in limit or test cases, and so he engages with the fraying edges of the law, its borders, the frontiers that are most heavily policed because they are most fragile, for example capital punishment, genocide, general strikes and terrorism. Derrida undertakes an exploration of violence through a reinterpretation of Walter Benjamins Critique of Violence. At the heart of Derridas difficult argument is a demand for justice that goes beyond the cataloguing of specific injustices, and beyond the terms of Benjamins critique. The utopian impulse that underpins Force of Law is carried over into Specters of Marx, Derridas recent explicit grappling with the legacy of Marxism. The links between these two texts by Derrida implies a sustained politics of radical commitment on the part of deconstruction, a commitment to future forms of legality and egalitarianism, a theory of justice posited upon prescience rather than precedent.     

What Happens to Law in a Refugee Camp?

How do people living in a refugee camp engage with legal practices, discourses, and institutions? Critics argue that refugee camps leave people in “legal limbo” depriving them of the “right to have rights” despite the presence of international humanitarian actors and the entitlements enshrined in international law. For that reason, refugee camps have become a highly visible symbol of failed human rights campaigns. In contrast, I found in an ethnography of the Buduburam Refugee Camp in Ghana, West Africa, that although people living as refugees faced chronic insecurity and injustice, they engaged extensively with several different facets of the law. I illuminate three interrelated dimensions of their experiences: (1) their development as international legal subjects; (2) their alienation from domestic legal institutions; and (3) their agency within the legal field. The article contributes to the research agenda on law in humanitarian settings an empirically grounded account of the subjective dimensions of legal alienation and mobilization in a refugee camp. More broadly, it contributes to international human rights debates by theorizing a mixed outcome of international human rights campaigns: the emergence of wards of international law, people deeply embedded in the international legal system, but alienated from local law.     

The Rule of Law in Today’s Africa∗

This article is based on the recent decision of the Supreme Court of Nigeria in a case involving illness resulting from the consumption of a bottled drink which contained a dead cockroach. The main issues considered were manufacturers' duty of care; the liability of a retailer in negligence; burden of proof; and causation. Evidence showed that the drink manufactured by the second respondent was sold by the first respondent to the appellant in the same condition in which it left the second respondent. The Court held that in the circumstances of the case, only the second respondent was liable to the appellant.     

Theories of Rights: Is There a Third Way?

Some important recent articles, including one in this journal,have sought to devise theories of rights that can transcendthe longstanding debate between the Interest Theory and theWill Theory. The present essay argues that those efforts failand that the Interest Theory and the Will Theory withstand thecriticisms that have been levelled against them. To be sure,the criticisms have been valuable in that they have promptedthe amplification and clarification of the two dominant theoriesof rights; but their upshot has been to reveal the need forthe improvement, rather than the abandonment, of those theories.     

Hybrid Texts and Uniform Law? The Multilingual Case Law of the Court of Justice of the European Union

The case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) is shaped by the language in which it is drafted—i.e. French. However, because French is rarely the mother tongue of those drafting that case law, the texts produced are often stilted and awkward. In addition, those drafting such case law are constrained in their use of language and style of writing (owing to pressures of technology and in order to reinforce the rule of law). These factors have led to the development of a ‘Court French’ which necessarily shapes the case law produced and has implications for its development, particularly insofar as it inevitably leads to a type of precedent in that case law. That case law also undergoes many permutations of translation into and out of up to 23 different languages. The resultant texts that make up the case law are hybrid in nature—consisting of a blend of cultural and linguistic patterns, constrained by a rigid formulistic drafting style and put through many permutations of translation. The present paper investigates the production of the Court’s multilingual case law and considers whether the hybrid nature of that case law can actually aid the presentation (and thus the development) of a ‘uniform’ EU case law.