Quick Links

Comparative Law News

CALL FOR PAPERS: Appointing Judges in an Age of Diversity: An International Conference on the JAC’s 10th Anniversary

Juris Diversitas - jeu, 03/26/2015 - 13:57
Venue: University of Birmingham Date: 6 and 7 November 2015The Institute of Judicial Administration at the University of Birmingham is hosting an SLSA-funded workshop to mark the 10th anniversary of the Judicial Appointments Commission.Confirmed speakers include Lady Hale, Graham Gee (Birmingham) Cora Hoexter (Wits), Alexander Horne (House of Commons), Rosemary Hunter (Queen Mary), Kate Malleson (Queen Mary), Andrew Lynch (NSW) Alan Paterson (Strathclyde), Erika Rackley (Birmingham) and Lorne Sossin (Toronto). Three speaker slots have been reserved for PhD students. Abstracts (of around 250 words) are invited from PhD students working on judicial appointments, broadly conceived to include issues of legitimacy, diversity, independence and accountability in the UK and elsewhere.Please send abstracts to  g.d.s.gee@bham.ac.uk by 30th April 2015. 
Catégories: Comparative Law News

CALL FOR PAPERS: AAA 2015 call of papers

Juris Diversitas - jeu, 03/26/2015 - 11:08
B/Ordering Infrastructures: Mediating Encounters across Difference
Panel Discussant: Professor Kregg Hetherington (Concordia University) 
Infrastructures underpin everyday life, mediating our experiences of space and time, and enabling --or obstructing-- the circulation of peoples, goods, knowledge, and meaning. Infrastructures are thus positioned at the center of contemporary struggles over access to resources, citizenship, and mobility. This panel will examine these concerns by considering how infrastructures shape, and are shaped by, forms of difference and inequality, producing material and metaphorical borders that organize social worlds. We seek papers on b/ordering infrastructures, that is, papers that explore how infrastructures work as bordering and ordering technologies.

Papers will consider (but are not restricted to) the following questions:

· How do infrastructures produce boundaries --but also encounters-- across difference? That is, how do infrastructures function as technologies of inclusion and exclusion?

· How do infrastructures organize human and nonhuman difference, mediating mobilities and exchanges that define landscapes and territories? How can infrastructures, as they are practiced and enacted, support or subvert regimes of governance and citizenship?

· Finally, how might attention to borders make us reimagine infrastructure? And how might attention to infrastructure make us reimagine borders?

The panel aims to bring into dialogue diverse approaches to mobility, materiality and power. While the anthropology of infrastructure conversant with science and technology studies and affect theory produces insights on the encounters of state and society, nature and culture, and people and things, social theory concerned with the intersections of race, ethnicity, gender, sexuality, and class interrogates borders (as metaphors but also as infrastructures) to illuminate the politics of translation, transgression, mediation, and encounter. We welcome papers engaging these frameworks and their interstices to consider infrastructure as built structures such as roads, pipes and checkpoints but also more-than-human configurations of bureaucracies, legal systems, emergency services, and other kinds of institutions. Contributions from advanced graduate students and recent PhDs preferred.

Submission deadline for abstracts (no more than 250 words): April 1, 2015. Interested participants please emailsmccall1@ucsc.edu. Please include an abstract, title, affiliation, and current status (PhD candidacy post fieldwork, Post Doc, Faculty position).

Panel Organizers:
Rosa Elena Ficek (Wesleyan University)
Stephanie Mc Callum (University of California, Santa Cruz)

Mediterranean Encounters: The Incommensurability of Difference

Panel Organizers: Netta Van Vliet (College of the Atlantic) & Carla Hung (Duke University)

This panel focuses on encounters with difference across the Mediterranean that consider the irreducible alterity and singularity of the other. The Mediterranean, that which is between lands, has long been narrated as a space of cultural and commercial exchange. At a time when the prevailing response to encounters with the foreign and the strange is through political and discursive assimilation, we ask what alternatives there might be to tolerance and inclusion. How can we understand encounters across the Mediterranean without recourse to a logic of equivalence? Anthropology?s interest in the study of difference has populated the discipline with a variety of tools, both conceptual and methodological, which can engage with what Jim Siegel (2008) has called "the objects and objections of ethnography." Circulating through feminist theory, postcolonial studies, and literary theory but beginning with and returning to anthropology's unique method of participant-observation, this panel tries to understand difference without folding it into an ontology of the self-same or "making the familiar strange and the strange familiar.? In so doing, it provides an opportunity to challenge anthropology's foundational concepts of culture, identity, and community. The panel examines the implications of such an approach for questions of politics, human rights, the law, and the tension between the universal, the particular, and the singular. What can be learned when ethnographic experience is understood in terms of products of representation rather than as evidence?

The Mediterranean has historically been a site of linguistic, political, economic and material encounters between East and West, North and South, Europe and its others, between Arab and Jew, European and African, refuge and asylum seeker.  Taking the Mediterranean as a site through which to conduct close readings of  the geopolitical and temporal movements across land and water, East and West, North and South, Europe and its others that have taken place on both sides of its shores, the panelists strive to think about the strange without making it familiar.  This panel is interested in addressing the questions posed by incommensurable difference through a diverse set of ethnographic examples, including engagements with movement between madness and reason, religious and secular, life and death, diaspora and at home, and human and inhuman.

Please send a 250 word abstract and a title for your proposed contribution to Carla Hung carla.hung@duke.edu by Wednesday April 1, 2015. Authors of accepted proposals will be notified by April 5th.

Entangled Border Crossings:  Identity Construction, Disciplinary Boundaries, and Asian Diaspora

Taking Asian and Asian American identities as dynamic and often times contested processes, the focus of this panel explores the multiple ways in which these subjectivities are constructed and renegotiated in a complex world characterized and shaped by active technological changes, flows of migrants and travelers, and capital assemblages. Even for those whose physical movement is limited, the trends and flows that transcend geographic and political borders are difficult to ignore. Examining these processes highlights the dynamism of Asian and Asian American identities, where the familiar/strange dynamic that is the theme of this year’s conference often comes into play as subjects encounter the Asian/Asian American “other.” The panel draws from ethnographic work conducted among people of Asian descent in specific sites in Asia, the U.S., or elsewhere to shed light on the challenges and opportunities created by the complex process of identity construction, which draws from a multitude of local and global resources.  What competing narratives do we find about Asian American or Asian identity and its relationship to a larger Asian diaspora?  What salient concepts or motivations are linked to various contemporary ideas of “Asian identity?”  Furthermore, the multi-sited, ethnographically rooted insights which characterize anthropological perspectives can help further push the boundaries of area studies approaches typified by Asian and Asian American Studies by providing grounded research on specific contexts of power, governmentality, and cultural politics that shape the very impact of these flows.  This panel seeks to scrutinize and unpack the complex processes that individuals find themselves in various cultural contexts to examine how a range of individuals imagine, interpret and understand this dynamic and at times contested process of identity construction.

Submission deadline for abstracts (no more than 250 words): April 1, 2015.

Interested participants please email both jheung@stmarys-ca.edu and louie@msu.edu.  Please include an abstract, title, affiliation, and current status (PhD candidacy post fieldwork, Post Doc, Faculty position).  Authors of accepted proposals will be notified by April 5th.

New Sending Communities and New Receiving Communities in Dialogue with Migration Theory 

In the past decade, theorists have argued that the notion of migrant networks at the heart of cumulative causation and transnational theories of migration requires revisiting. These theorists assert that because research tends to report on already existing networks, a number of key questions remain. This critique suggests that research on new sending and new receiving communities is well-poised to evaluate and contribute to migration theory. New sending and receiving communities often garner little attention, especially when located in marginalized parts of countries or regions that already have a strong presence in international migration streams.  This panel takes as its starting point a dialogue between these communities and migration theory. From the perspective of sending communities, what is the connection between international sojourns and historical antecedents of localized moves? Cumulative causation theory posits a few individuals--people whose nonconformity in their own societies lead them to travel outside it--open paths for prospective migrants. Nonconformists are not necessarily trendsetters. Thus, we ask: How do their actions become popularized and, in some cases, self-reinforcing? From the perspective of new receiving communities, this panel questions: how do employers, landowners, shopkeepers, and other residents establish the social capital and cultural skills required to operate in changing cultural settings? In both new sending and new receiving communities, how does migration work to alter social constructs such as class, race, gender, kin, and other power relations? Which beliefs, ideas, and behaviors--at home and abroad—are most vulnerable to migration’s effects at its outset? While these questions respond to today’s prominent theories, the panel also considers how the ethnography of new sending and receiving communities opens possibilities for novel considerations and explanatory frameworks.

Panel Organizers:  Nora Haenn, North Carolina State University and Michelle Moran-Taylor, University of Denver

Panel Discussant: Deborah Boehm, University of Nevada, Reno

Potential participants should send their abstracts (250 words max) to Nora Haenn (nora_haenn@ncsu.edu) by April 3rd, 2015. Please include the title of the paper, author’s name, affiliation, and email. Thank you.

Making the Familiar Strange: experimenting with cultures of biomedical interventions

Anthropologists have long worked with and along biomedical interventions. Such research has explored areas of medical treatment, hygiene, child maternal care, epidemics, vaccination, and drug development. Drawing from a rich literature of medical anthropologists and science and technology scholars, these studies have raised issues of generalizability across populations and individuals, characterizations of research subject, recruitment procedures, and methodologies of comparison.

This panel is interested in particular forms of interventions that are associated with specific and notions of evidence, namely, the growing reliance on so-called evidence based methods, and the associated method of the RCT that is dominating health and social policy in the US, UK, and across Europe.  As anthropologists becoming entangled in these processes of clinical trial implementation, this panel will raise questions as to whether or not we are becoming too familiar with the language and culture of biomedical interventions. And, to address this concern, contributors will discuss ways to engage and experiment with intervention research in order to make the familiar and assumed dependable research method of the RCT appear strange and incomplete.

The panel will therefore address how it is that RCTs and the concept of the intervention has become so normalised, familiar, standard, and even boring, and in what ways anthropology might unsettle this. These experiment could include creative conceptualisations of biomedical interventions and research designs, explorations of how biomedical research methods encapsulate specific worldviews, and how imaginaries of places, people, and bodies are enacted in the development of the research design.

We are also interested in what does not normally get included in the formal research protocols or publications of evidence based medicine. A running theme will therefore also be the notion of surplus information or the “remainders” (Strathern 1991) of trial research.  As anthropologists that study interventions and research design (rather than simply contribute to their operation) we invite papers that capture the residual or strange knowledge that does not get registered in usual systems of knowledge production. These can be explorations into the body of excess data production, the unintended consequences or outcomes that are not typically acknowledged, or novel analytical ways to think and write about the mundane processes of standardization and research design.

We invite papers that explore questions related to:

· How global standards (such as research questionnaires, research protocols, systems of measurement and analysis etc.) travel across boundaries and are applied in locally situated trials?
· How data become standardized in the context of pooling international clinical trial data from various consortiums?
· What kinds of labour are involved in using animals models to support/justify the interventions applied in clinical trials on humans?

· What kinds of research design allow for the generation of new questions in the ongoing process of trial or study implementation?

· How are clinical trials that test behavioural interventions used to expand research on diabetes, obesity, cancer, and HIV?

· What kinds of locally specific practices are used in the everyday implementation of multi-sited clinical trials?

· What labour is involved in standardizing clinical trials in the everyday? What kinds of “random effects” or variability are masked in the process of standardizing ?

We invite scholars whose work examines research design and interventions broadly defined, to join us for the 2015 American Anthropological Association meeting in Denver, Colorado. Please e-mail your abstract of no more than 250 words to Natali Valdez nvaldez919@gmail.com by April 9, 2015.

If you have any questions, please contact one of the following panel organizers:
Line Hillersdal (University of Copenhagen) njh933@hum.ku.dk
Jonas Winther (University of Copenhagen) tsn797@hum.ku.dk
Natali Valdez (University of California, Irvine) nvaldez919@gmail.com

Going Public / Becoming Private: Collaboration, Nontransparency, and Hybridity between Government and Industry

Conditions of late capitalism, socialism and post-socialism have demonstrated that when it comes to relations between government and industry, myriad configurations are possible. NGOs and state-owned enterprises push the boundaries of what might be considered a business or a corporation, while privatization and corruption circumscribe new and strange members within constellations of the state, government agencies (Stark 1996), public property (Verdery 1997), and public money. Mindful that what we consider to be public must be made public (Latour and Weibel 2005), and that multiple economic systems operate, cheek by jowl, in the same spaces and institutions (Gibson-Graham 2006), papers on this panel ethnographically examine how forms of relationality between industry and government at all levels reshape our understandings of the state, local government, small and medium enterprises, and corporations, and reconfigure notions about what institutions, property, and forms of value are public or private. Ultimately, we explore how understandings of government-industry relations come to be, and the effects these understandings bring about in the world.

Papers for this panel might consider:
NGOs, State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs)
Special Economic Zones (SEZs)
Corporate governance
Public-private partnerships
Corruption, transparency and nontransparency
Taxation or insurance sweetheart deals
Intellectual property rights guarantees
Utility monopolies
Government land seizures and eminent domain
Too-big-to-fail financial institutions, moral hazard
Please send expressions of interest by March 27 or ASAP, and abstracts by April 3, to Leksa Lee at achmiele@uci.edu.
Catégories: Comparative Law News

JOURNAL: (2015) 2:1 Critical Analysis of Law - New Historical Jurisprudence & Historical Analysis of Law

(2015) 2:1 Critical Analysis of Law, an International & Interdisciplinary Law Review, is out. 
Its theme is
New Historical Jurisprudence & Historical Analysis of LawThe New Historical Jurisprudence issue highlights and encourages a trend in recent legal scholarship, or rather scholarship on law, that--like the original historical jurisprudence--pursues a historical analysis of law, as a form of critical analysis of law, rather than legal history, as applied historiography. Generated by theorists with a historical sensibility, and historians with theoretical curiosity, this emerging body of work exploits and challenges the intersection of history and jurisprudence in innovative and exciting ways.It includes:New Historical Jurisprudence: Legal History as Critical Analysis of LawMarkus D. DubberOn the Coloniality of Modern LawSamera EsmeirRadbruch’s Rechtsstaat and Schmitt’s Legal Order: Legalism, Legality, and the Institution of LawMireille HildebrandtThe Judicialization of PoliceAaron T. KnappTransatlantic Functionalism: New Deal Models and European IntegrationPeter L. Lindseth“Society Owes Them Much”: Veteran Defendants and Criminal Responsibility in Australia in the Twentieth CenturyArlie LoughnanPrivate Law Codification, Modernization and Nationalism: A View from Critical Legal HistoryHeikki Pihlajamäki“Comparing” Jewish and Islamic Legal Traditions: Between Disciplinarity and Critical Historical JurisprudenceLena SalaymehThe Riddle of Sub-judice and the Modern Law of ContemptGalia Schneebaum, Shai J. LaviRegarding Untimeliness: Medieval Legal History and Modern LawKarl ShoemakerThe Rejection of Horizontal Judicial Review During America’s Colonial PeriodRobert J. Steinfeld
Catégories: Comparative Law News

JOURNAL: (2015) 2:1 Critical Analysis of Law - New Historical Jurisprudence & Historical Analysis of Law

Juris Diversitas - mar, 03/24/2015 - 13:56
(2015) 2:1 Critical Analysis of Law, an International & Interdisciplinary Law Review, is out. 
Its theme is
New Historical Jurisprudence & Historical Analysis of LawThe New Historical Jurisprudence issue highlights and encourages a trend in recent legal scholarship, or rather scholarship on law, that--like the original historical jurisprudence--pursues a historical analysis of law, as a form of critical analysis of law, rather than legal history, as applied historiography. Generated by theorists with a historical sensibility, and historians with theoretical curiosity, this emerging body of work exploits and challenges the intersection of history and jurisprudence in innovative and exciting ways.It includes: New Historical Jurisprudence: Legal History as Critical Analysis of LawMarkus D. Dubber
On the Coloniality of Modern LawSamera Esmeir
Radbruch’s Rechtsstaat and Schmitt’s Legal Order: Legalism, Legality, and the Institution of LawMireille Hildebrandt
The Judicialization of PoliceAaron T. Knapp
Transatlantic Functionalism: New Deal Models and European IntegrationPeter L. Lindseth
“Society Owes Them Much”: Veteran Defendants and Criminal Responsibility in Australia in the Twentieth CenturyArlie Loughnan
Private Law Codification, Modernization and Nationalism: A View from Critical Legal HistoryHeikki Pihlajamäki
“Comparing” Jewish and Islamic Legal Traditions: Between Disciplinarity and Critical Historical JurisprudenceLena Salaymeh
The Riddle of Sub-judice and the Modern Law of ContemptGalia Schneebaum, Shai J. Lavi
Regarding Untimeliness: Medieval Legal History and Modern LawKarl Shoemaker
The Rejection of Horizontal Judicial Review During America’s Colonial PeriodRobert J. Steinfeld
Catégories: Comparative Law News

ARTICLE: Ramadan on Islamic Legal Hybridity and Patriarchal Liberalism in the Shari'a Courts in Israel

Juris Diversitas - lun, 03/23/2015 - 08:19
I'm pleased to report that another paper linked to our Doing Justice: Official and Unofficial ‘Legalities’ in Practice Colloquiumheld at the Centre Jacques-Berque (Rabat, Morocco) from 15-16 June 2012, has been published. 

Moussa Abou Ramadan (Strasbourg)'s 'Islamic Legal Hybridity and Patriarchal Liberalism in the Shari'a Courts in Israel' has been published in the Journal of Levantine Studies. Its abstract reads:
The civil judicial family law system and the shari‘a courts in Israel are a fascinating site for the study of legal hybridity, particularly with regard to cases involving the legal and religious rights of women. Legal hybridity is found both in the shari‘a courts, even when ruling on cases that are under their exclusive jurisdiction, and in the family courts that apply provisions of Islamic and Israeli law. In this article, I examine as a case study of the problem of appointing a woman as arbitrator between quarelling spouses in the shari‘a court arbitration process. This example shows how a shari‘a court operates under pressure from the secular civil judicial system. It is discernible how a system of legal hybridity gives rise to multiple discourses deriving from different normative systems and various players—such as human rights organizations, Islamic feminist movements, secular feminist movements, and the Israel Supreme Court—seeking to navigate the discourse in pursuit of their interests. My central thesis is that this system of legal hybridity is enhancing a patriarchal liberalism that is filled with obstacles and hurdles preventing full equality. 
Catégories: Comparative Law News

ARTICLE ANNOUNCEMENT: Introduction: Religious Law in the 21st Century

Juris Diversitas - ven, 03/20/2015 - 06:44
By Michael A. Helfand Pepperdine 
University School of Law

Professor Helfand introduces this symposium on Religious Law in the 21st Century. Helfand notes that a recurring theme in recent debates over the relationship between law and religion is the unique challenge of reconciling conflicts not just between law and religion, but between the law of the nation-state and “religious legal communities” -- that is, communities that primarily experience their religious norms through the prism of legal rules. Muslim and Jewish communities serve as prime examples of such religious legal communities, and the challenges faced by these communities often parallel each other in important ways. Thus, an important subset of contemporary religious controversies -- from circumcision bans to anti-Sharia laws -- emerge as not only conflicts between law and religion, but as conflicts between law and law. And it is to this unique set of questions that the jointly-sponsored program of the Islamic Law and Jewish Law Sections of the American Association of Law Schools was addressed. The program was split into two thematic panels, and the articles in this symposium reflect those themes. The first -- titled “Religious Law in U.S. Courts” -- considered the various contexts in which U.S. courts have been asked to address religious questions that touch upon religious law. The second -- titled “Religious Law in the Secular State” -- considered contemporary issues related to the practice and implementation of religious law in secular democracies. Together, these papers bring new insight to these questions and serve as a springboard for discussion and debate about how religious law will fit into the ever-evolving landscape of the 21st century.

Click here to download this paper.
Catégories: Comparative Law News

CONFERENCE ANNOUNCEMENT: 2nd Annual International & Comparative Urban Law Conference

Juris Diversitas - jeu, 03/19/2015 - 13:58
June 29, 2015, Paris, France

The Fordham Urban Law Center is pleased to announce a call for participation for the 2nd Annual International and Comparative Urban Law Conference, to be held on Monday, June 29, 2015
The all-day Conference will be held at the Sorbonne Law School at the Universite Paris 1 Pantheon-Sorbonne in Paris, France. The Conference is co-sponsored by the Sorbonne Center for Study and Research on Environmental, Development, Urban and Tourism Law (SERDEAUT).

TOPICS: The Conference will provide a dynamic forum for legal and other scholars to engage and generate diverse international, comparative and interdisciplinary perspectives in the burgeoning field of urban law. The Conference will explore overlapping themes, tensions and opportunities for deeper scholarly investigation and practice with a comparative perspective across the following urban law topics, among others:
- Structure and workings of local authority and autonomy
- Urban governance
- Environmental sustainability
- Economic and community development
- Criminal justice
- Urban public health
- Affordable housing
- Municipal finance
- Local government consumer protection
- Family law and urban planning

The goal of the Conference is to facilitate an in-depth engagement across sub-specialties within the legal academy to help develop an understanding of urban law in the twenty-first century.

PROPOSAL SUBMISSION: Potential participants in panels and workshops at the Conference should submit a one-page proposal to Nisha Mistry, Director, Fordham Urban Law Center, at nmistry2@law.fordham.edu

If you have a draft paper, please include it with your proposal. Participants do not need to have prepared a formal paper in order to join the program. Deadline for topic proposal submissions: April 20, 2015.

PUBLICATION: This year, the Urban Law Center will publish the first edition of a multi-year book series compiling cross-cutting global perspectives on law and urbanism, with a core focus on comparative enquiry. This Conference will serve as the basis for the second volume in this series, which will be published by Ashgate (as part of Juris Diversitas) following customary review and selection processes. If you are interested in potential publication, please indicate this interest at the time of your proposal submission.

ABOUT THE URBAN LAW CENTER: The Urban Law Center at Fordham Law School in New York City is committed to investigating and affecting the role of the law and legal systems in contemporary urbanism. Seehttp://law.fordham.edu/urbanlawcenter.htm for more information about the Center.

ABOUT SERDEAUT: Today, SERDEAUT is the only research center in France dedicated to environmental, development, urban, housing, and tourism law altogether. These research and expertise themes directly concern the socio-economic problems that are currently of the utmost importance in France, Europe, and the rest of the world: sustainable development, territorial cohesion, economic development and housing. See for more information about SERDEAUT.
Catégories: Comparative Law News

BOOK: Bernard DURAND, Historical Introduction to Colonial Law (Paris: Economica, 2015), 675 p., ISBN 9782717867190, € 49

(image source: economica.fr)

Nomôdos announced the publication of Bernard Durand's manual Introduction historique au droit colonial (Economica).

Cet ouvrage traite de la projection coloniale dans ses dimensions juridiques. Il décrit une mondialisation par la colonisation – dépassant l’histoire coloniale de la France – au cours de laquelle les choix de droits par tous les États se sont faits sur des territoires disputés, longtemps insuffisamment dessinés géographiquement. D’où des «colonies» aux habillages juridiques divers, épousant – en les transformant – les débats des siècles successifs et confrontées aux défis permanents de l’international.Cette Introduction insiste sur le recours au droit utile à l’entreprise coloniale et aux rapprochements opérés dans des sociétés complexes ainsi que sur l’équilibre trouvé entre droits «natifs» originaux, droits indigènes et droits d’importation. Il interroge l’élaboration d’une science du «droit colonial» encore en déficit d’autonomie mais qui confirme l’existence de «souverainetés en morceaux».Author bio:
Bernard Durand est agrégé d’Histoire du Droit, professeur émérite de l’Université Montpellier I et professeur associé à l’Université Senghor d’Alexandrie. Doyen honoraire de la Faculté de Droit de Montpellier, il a été pendant 13 ans professeur à la Faculté de Droit de Dakar où il a créé le département d’Histoire du Droit africain. More information on the publisher's website.
Catégories: Comparative Law News

CONFERENCE: The Logics of Law (Sceaux, 2-3 April 2015)

 (Image: Wikimedia Commons)
The University of Sceaux hosts an interdisciplinary conference on 2-3 April, dedicated to the theme 'the logics of law', featuring inter alia Jean-Louis Halpérin and Michel Troper.

Ce colloque à vocation transdisciplinaire, est ouvert aux historiens, juristes, politistes et sociologues. Attachée à une conception « réaliste » du fait juridique qui considère le droit comme un fait social et historique, ce colloque est organisé autour de quatre demi-journées. La première sera consacrée à l’épistémologie du droit. La seconde demi-journée portera sur la question du droit et sa portée légitimatrice dans les « groupements hiérocratiques » (Max Weber), donc sur les liens entre droit et domination spirituelle. La troisième demi-journée s’intéressera à la même thématique, mais concernant les « groupements politiques » (Max Weber). Enfin la quatrième demi-journée se concentrera sur les liens entre codification et enjeux de pouvoir (convention, constitution), autrement dit sur le droit comme enjeu et instrument de luttes pour la conquête et la répartition du pouvoir, ainsi que ses traductions normatives.
Jeudi 2 avril 2015Pratiques scientifiques en sociologie historique du droit9h00 : Accueil des participants
  • Antoine Latreille, Professeur de Droit privé, Doyen de la Faculté Jean-Monnet, Université Paris-Sud.
Introduction : Du réalisme juridique à la sociologie historique du droitPrésidence : Daniel Roche, Professeur honoraire au Collège de France, chaire d’Histoire de la France des Lumières.
  • 9h30 : Bernard Lacroix, Professeur de Science politique, Groupe d’Analyse Politique – Université Paris-Ouest : Peut-on faire une sociologie historique du droit ?
  • 09h50 : Jean-Louis Halpérin, Professeur d’Histoire du droit, Centre de Théorie et Analyse du Droit – École Normale Supérieure : Max Weber et l’épistémologie du droit.
10h10 : Discussions10h30 : Pause
  • 11h00 : Michel Troper, Professeur émérite de Droit public, Centre de Théorie et Analyse du Droit – Université Paris-Ouest : L’émergence du droit et de l’État.
  • 11h20 : Soulef Ayad-Bergounioux, A.T.E.R post-doctorante en Histoire du droit, Droit et Sociétés Religieuses – Université Paris-Sud : De l’État comme fait historique à la révolution comme concept juridique : un cas idéal-typique, la Révolution française et la création de l’État bureaucratique.
12h30 : DéjeunerNormes hiérocratiques et domination spirituelle (1)Présidence : Brigitte Basdevant-Gaudemet, Professeur d’Histoire du droit, Droit et Sociétés Religieuses – Université Paris-Sud.
  • 14h20 : Isabelle Kalinowski, Directrice de recherches – CNRS – Pays Germaniques. Transferts Culturels– École Normale Supérieure : Sociologie du droit et sociologie religieuse selon Max Weber : codifications juridiques et rationalisations théologiques à partir du Deutéronome.
  • 14h40 : Baudoin Dupret, Directeur de recherches – CNRS – Centre Jacques Berque de Rabat : Droit et charia : un concept en contexte.
15h00 : Discussions15h20 : Pause
  • 15h40 : Miguel Alvarez Ortega, Maître de conférences en Histoire du droit, Université de Séville : Textes et faits : Le problème du pouvoir dans les sources canoniques bouddhistes
  • 16h00 : Sandra Vignier, Doctorante en Histoire du droit, Droit et Sociétés Religieuses – Université Paris-Sud : L’interventionnisme bénéficial au début du XIVème siècle comme instrument du pouvoir papal.
  • 16h20 : Rachel Guillas, Doctorante en Histoire du droit, Institut d’Histoire du Droit – Université Paris II : Procédure inquisitoire et lutte contre les hérésies, une peine pour de simples pensées ?
Vendredi 3 avril 2015Normes hiérocratiques et domination spirituelle (2)Présidence : Brigitte Basdevant-Gaudemet, Professeur d’Histoire du droit, Droit et Sociétés Religieuses – Université Paris-Sud.9h00 : Accueil des participants
  • 9h20 : Hervé Serry, Directeur de recherches – CNRS – CRESPPA-CSU – Université Paris VIII : Intellectuels catholiques français et domination spirituelle traditionnelle.
  • 09h40 : Franck Zarlenga, Doctorant en Histoire du droit, Université Paris Est Créteil : The Established and the Outsiders: le système des cultes reconnus de la France concordataire (1810-1905) à la lumière d’un concept sociologique de Norbert Elias. Interrogation sur les rapports entre Sociologie et Histoire du droit.
10h00 :DiscussionsNormes politiques et dominations étatiquesPrésidence : Boris Bernabé, Professeur d’Histoire du Droit, Droit et Sociétés Religieuses – Université Paris-Sud.
  • 10h20 : Arnault Skornicki, Maître de conférences, Institut des Sciences Sociales du Politique – Université Paris-Ouest: Foucault et l’ordre juridique. La généalogie de l’État dans Sécurité, Territoire, Population.
  • 10h40 : Dominique Linhardt, Chargé de recherches – CNRS – Centre Marcel Mauss – EHESS : Linéaments d’une approche « polygénétique » en sociologie de l’État.
11h00 : Discussions11h20 : Pause
  • 11h30 : Clarisse Siméant, Maître de conférences, Droit et Sociétés Religieuses – Université Paris-Sud : Mectre en l’obéissance du roy les populations des principautés rattachées à la Couronne de France (xive-xve siècles.).
  • 11h50 : Paul Bergounioux, Docteur en Histoire, Institut d’Histoire de la Révolution française – Université Paris I : La loi du Grand Capital : logiques sociale et historique du droit pénal militaire révolutionnaire (1789-1791).
12h45 : DéjeunerLe droit : une sociodicée objectivée ?Présidence : Olivier Descamps, Professeur d’Histoire du droit, Institut d’Histoire du Droit, Université Paris II.
  • 14h20 : Thomas Hochmann, Professeur de Droit public, Institut Rémois du Droit Approfondi – Université de Reims Champagne-Ardenne : Sans le normativisme, la sociologie du droit n’est rien : Hans Kelsen, critique de Eugen Ehrlich.
  • 14h40 : Gérard Mauger, Directeur de recherches – CNRS –  CESSP-CSE- EHESS : La délinquance juvénile : objet du droit, objet de sociologie.
15h00 : Discussions15h20 : Pause
  • 15h50 : Marie-Anne Daillant, doctorante en Histoire du droit, Droit et Sociétés Religieuses – Université Paris-Sud : Neutraliser les effets de l’inexécution contractuelle, option ouverte aux contractants, prérogative royale, et préoccupation d’ordre moral.
  • 16h10 : Luisa Brunori-Clément, Chargée de recherches – CNRS – Centre d’Histoire Judiciaire – Université Lille II : Droit et justification du profit : des personnes aux capitaux au début de l’Age Moderne.
16h30 : Discussion16h50 :Conclusion généraleContact:
  • Soulef Bergounioux
    courriel : soulef [dot] ayad [at] club-internet [dot] fr
  • Sonia SUIHLI
    courriel : sonia [dot] suihli [at] u-psud [dot] fr

 Practical information:
Salle Vedel - Université Paris Sud – Jean Monnet, Centre Droit et Sociétés Religieuses (EA – 1611) 54, Boulevard Desgranges
Sceaux, France (92330)  Flyer here.

Source: Calenda.org
Catégories: Comparative Law News

CALL FOR PAPERS: Categories in Law (Sceaux, 20 November 2015); DEADLINE 30 June 2015

(the castle of Sceaux, image source: Wikimedia Commons)
Nomôdos announced the call for papers of the University of Sceaux's conference on "concepts of law", including a historical dimension.
Présentation Le raisonnement par catégories est inhérent à toute science. Il revêt une importance particulière en droit, dans la mesure où il est lié à l’opération intellectuelle de qualification juridique. Les catégories en droit sont créées par le législateur, le juge ou la doctrine, et procèdent même parfois de leur interaction. Consacrer une journée d’étude aux catégories en droit implique de s’attarder sur plusieurs pistes de réflexion. Sans prétendre à l’exhaustivité, il serait souhaitable d’envisager les suivantes, à commencer par la définition de la catégorie en droit. 1. La catégorie en droit : un effort de définition Dans un sens usuel, la catégorie est l’ensemble de choses qui ont un certain nombre de caractéristiques communes. Or, une telle approche suffit-elle pour définir la catégorie en droit ? Le juriste qui, comme d’autres, use des catégories doit s’interroger sur une éventuelle spécificité des catégories en droit. Si une telle spécificité existe, il doit en rechercher la cause qui pourrait résider dans le caractère essentiel du recours aux catégories lors de l’opération de qualification juridique. Si qualifier n’est rien d’autre que ranger dans une catégorie, pourrait- on envisager un droit sans catégorie(s) ? Définir la catégorie en droit implique, entre autres, de la distinguer des termes voisins. À cet effet, il serait notamment envisageable d’opérer une distinction entre la catégorie, la notion et le concept. La définition de la catégorie en droit est indispensable pour pouvoir identifier les différentes catégories en droit. 2. L’identification des catégories en droit Non seulement pensé et enseigné en fonction des catégories, le droit est aussi construit autour de celles-ci. La question des catégories « en droit » comprend ainsi celle des catégories « de droit ». Le thème de la journée d’études permettra alors notamment d’examiner la summa divisio entre droit public et droit privé, ainsi que la distinction entre le droit national et le droit international ou encore entre ce dernier et le droit de l’Union européenne. Ces droits se distinguent et s’interpénètrent, c’est d’ailleurs leur interpénétration qui pose parfois la question de leur distinction. Si chaque droit prévoit ses catégories, la rencontre entre deux droits emporte la rencontre entre des catégories qui peuvent se chevaucher. Les complications sont inévitables lorsque ces droits sont hiérarchisés, et l’on pense alors tout particulièrement au droit de l’Union européenne souvent confronté aux droits des États membres. Chaque catégorie de droit prévoit en outre des sous-catégories qui posent les mêmes questions. Ainsi, le droit public connaît-il notamment le droit constitutionnel et le droit administratif. Chaque droit prévoit enfin des catégories en son sein, les catégories « en droit » au sens strict. L’administrativiste pensera, par exemple, à la distinction entre l’acte administratif unilatéral et le contrat administratif ; au sein de l’acte administratif unilatéral pourra-t-il faire la distinction entre les actes réglementaires et non réglementaires, etc. Le droit ayant vocation à régler les comportements humains, il crée des catégories dans lesquelles il range ses sujets, les sujets de droit, afin de leur appliquer les réglementations qu’il prévoit. Ainsi, les individus peuvent-ils être majeurs ou mineurs, usagers du service public ou au contraire collaborateurs occasionnels de ce dernier, créanciers ou débiteurs, etc, un même « sujet » étant susceptible d’entrer simultanément dans diverses catégories. Dans le travail d’identification de ces catégories, il serait peut-être intéressant de s’interroger sur l’éventualité de catégories interdites (on pense par exemple à l’interdiction de catégorisation en fonction de la couleur de peau, valable en France mais qui ne se retrouve pas aux États- Unis), dépassées (« vides ») ou sui generis. Le recensement de différentes catégories en droit permettra ensuite d’évaluer leur pérennité. 3. La pérennité des catégories en droit La question de la pérennité des catégories en droit renvoie aux variations de leur contenu, à leur mutabilité ou à leur transformation, sous l’effet de diverses contraintes. Tout comme les différentes branches du droit, les catégories en droit tendent à se rapprocher, révélant sa profonde unité. Une journée d’études sur les catégories en droit ne pourrait passer outre la question de l’unité du droit, telle que confirmée par leur interaction, voire leur interdépendance. Par exemple, le droit de l’Union européenne embrasse les concepts du droit national, et le droit national devient de plus en plus marqué par le droit de l’Union, cette influence réciproque contribuant à la convergence des ordres juridiques respectifs. En outre, le droit privé se « publicise », et le droit public se « privatise ». Pour aller encore plus loin, le droit constitutionnel influe sur l’élaboration du droit administratif, et les frontières entre les instruments de l’administration deviennent de moins en moins étanches. De plus, certaines distinctions fondamentales au sein de chaque branche de droit tendent à disparaître, alors que naissent des branches du droit de plus en plus vastes, comme c’est le cas du droit administratif européen ou du droit global. Ancrées dans une appréhension finaliste du droit, ces profondes mutations appellent une réflexion particulière sur l’office du juge. 4. Catégories en droit et office du juge Le juge est créateur des catégories et s’appuie sur celles-ci lors de l’opération de qualification juridique. La question des catégories en droit est liée au débat relatif à la place de l’empirisme et du conceptualisme dans la manière de juger. Finalement, l’érosion des catégories participe à l’évolution de l’office du juge. Par exemple, le juge national est le juge de droit commun du droit de l’Union européenne, et le juge administratif devient parfois juge constitutionnel ou juge judiciaire, ce rapprochement fonctionnel reflétant le rapprochement entre les ordres juridiques respectifs. Directives pour les propositions de communication Les jeunes chercheurs qui désirent participer à la journée d’études doivent présenter leur proposition de communication au plus tard le 30 juin 2015. Celle-ci ne devra pas dépasser les 3500 signes. Elle sera idéalement accompagnée d’une brève présentation de son auteur (diplôme(s), statut actuel et publications éventuelles). L’ensemble devra être adressé à M. Dany Harrari, à l’adresse mail: danyharrari@gmail.com
Catégories: Comparative Law News

BOOK: Antoine ASTAING & François LORMANT (eds.), Lawyers and Custom, From the Middle Ages to the Civil Code [Histoire du Droit] (Nancy UP, 2015), 272 p., ISBN 9782814301382, € 20

(Image source: lcdpu.fr)

Nomôdos announced the publication of a collective work on "lawyers and custom", collecting papers presented at the University of Nancy (Lorraine) in 2010. The book is part of the Legal History collection of Nancy UP.

La coutume, sorte de droit établi par les mœurs, semble appartenir au juriste. Quel est cependant le rôle exact joué par celui-ci, tant dans l'élaboration des règles coutumières, leur application et leur évolution?Les 1er et 2 juillet 2010, le Centre Lorrain d’Histoire du Droit (EA 1142) et le Réseau des historiens du Droit du Grand-Est ont organisé à Nancy un colloque international pour aborder ces questions. Les réponses sont diverses d’un pays, d’une province ou parfois d’une seigneurie à l’autre. Les chercheurs qui s’intéressent aux différentes régions de France ou d’ailleurs (Québec, Tunisie, République Démocratique du Congo, ...) ont ainsi pu confronter les résultats de leurs recherches.Au-delà d’une géographie coutumière, c’est une véritable géographie des forces de pouvoir, inscrites dans la longue durée, qui s’est dégagée. Une géographie, mais peut-être surtout une chronologie de ces forces, locales ou royales.
Table of contents:
  • Antoine Astaing – Avant propos
  • Virginie Lemonnier-Lesage – Préface
  • Jean Gay – La coutume dans le Comté de Bourgogne au Moyen Âge;
  • Luc Gueraud – L'invocation de la Consuetudo Regni et de la Consuetudo Francie dans les actes de la chancellerie capétienne (XIIe-XIIIe siècles);
  • Maïté Lesne-Ferret – Du «parfait juriste» dans des coutumes des pays de droit écrit, au XIIIe siècle ;
  • Isabelle Mathieu – La coutume vue à travers les archives de la pratique judiciaire: le cas des tribunaux seigneuriaux de l'Anjou et du Maine (XIVe-milieu XVIe siècles);
  • Christian Dugas de la Boissonny – Barthélémy de Chasseneuz (1480-1541);
  • Alain Durieux – Comment ont été rédigés et publiées les Coutumes générales du bailliage de Meaux (3-5 octobre 1509);
  • Jean Coudert – Le droit de chasse des bourgeois d'Épinal et sa défense (XVe-XVIe siècles);
  • Florent Roemer – Avocat général et coutumes;
  • Jean Bart – Les commissaires à terrier, rédacteurs de coutumes;
  • David Gilles – Les juristes de la Nouvelle-France face à la Coutume de Paris: histoire d'une adaptation sous influence;
  • François Lormant – Paul Chaline : Méthode générale pour l'intelligence des coutumes de France, Metz, chez Antoine éditeur-imprimeur, 1725.;
  • Oualid Gadhoum – La coutume en droit privé tunisien: déclin ou persistance?
  • Yves Jeanclos – Si la loi était une coutume qui a réussi?
  • Lucien Katchunga Kanefu – Du rôle du juge dans l’évolution ou l’extinction d’une coutume. Le cas de la coutume traditionnelle africaine au Congo-Belge (actuelle République Démocratique du Congo).

More information on the publisher's website.
Catégories: Comparative Law News

CALL FOR PAPERS: The 5th International Conference on Language, Law and Discourse

Juris Diversitas - jeu, 03/19/2015 - 08:24
The 5th International Conference on Language, Law and Discourse27 September-1 October 2015
Communication and Fairness in Legal Settings
For additional information, see the conference website here.Note that the deadline for abstracts is quickly approaching!
Catégories: Comparative Law News

JURIS DIVERSITAS - BOOK: Berti, Good, and Tarabout (eds), Of Doubt and Proof: Ritual and Legal Practices of Judgment

Juris Diversitas - jeu, 03/19/2015 - 07:16
  • We're very proud to note the latest publication in the Juris Diversitas Series
  • Berti, Good, and Tarabout (eds), Of Doubt and Proof: Ritual and Legal Practices of Judgment
  • All institutions concerned with the process of judging - whether it be deciding between alternative courses of action, determining a judge’s professional integrity, assigning culpability for an alleged crime, or ruling on the credibility of an asylum claimant - are necessarily directly concerned with the question of doubt. By putting ritual and judicial settings into comparative perspective, in contexts as diverse as Indian and Taiwanese divination and international cricket, as well as legal processes in France, the UK, India, Denmark, and Ghana, this book offers a comprehensive and novel perspective on techniques for casting and dispelling doubt, and the roles they play in achieving verdicts or decisions that appear both valid and just.

    Broadening the theoretical understandings of the social role of doubt, both in social science and in law, the authors present these understandings in ways that not only contribute to academic knowledge but are also useful to professionals and other participants engaged in the process of judging. This collection will consequently be of great interest to academics researching in the fields of legal anthropology, ritual studies, legal sociology, criminology, and socio-legal studies.
    • The Contents, Introduction, and Index are available here.
    • Reviews: 
    • ‘Of Doubt and Proof highlights issues of considerable importance for the social sciences, not least for lawyers and others such as anthropologists concerned with what Bourdieu called the “juridical field”. Its comparative scope, with studies of ritual and judicial processes in Africa, Asia and Europe, is especially impressive and enhances its originality.’
    • Ralph Grillo, University of Sussex, UK

      ‘Doubt is not the opposite of belief, as anthropologists have recently shown, but depends upon belief and in turn helps to constitute it. This book, in writing that is both precise and wonderfully imaginative, explores this apparent paradox in relation to the legal terrain, where doubt is routinely cast and then dispelled through compelling public performances. In the process, the book - showing how law and ritual may have much more in common than formerly supposed - innovatively ranges across settings from asylum courts in France, Denmark and the UK, through Indian temple consultations, to Chinese divination. It ambitiously challenges us to think beyond the level of the obvious, while also making a thoughtful and rigorous contribution to the novel field of the anthropology of doubt and evidence.’
    • Deborah James, London School of Economics, UK

      ‘This volume represents a crucial intervention into the question of what happens in institutional settings where doubt must be exercised, not as a presumed internal or affective state, but as a technique of knowledge formation. The cases presented here show that doubt is such a successful technique that it must be managed through a host of other social forms. These cases also show that it is often divinatory practices, and not courtroom judgements, in which doubt is more rigorously exercised in arriving at a decision. This is a collection that shows through felicitous juxtaposition of the legal and the ritual how the former shares far more sociological elements with the latter than is often acknowledged.’
    • Melissa Demian, The Australian National University
  • About the Editors: 
  • Daniela Berti is ‘Chargée de Recherche’ at the French National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS) in Paris, and a member of the Centre for Himalayan Studies at Villejuif. Her research in North India focuses on ritual interactions, politico-ritual roles and practices formerly associated with kingship, and on the ethnography of court cases in India. She recently coordinated with Gilles Tarabout an international research programme funded by the Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR), entitled Just-India: A Joint Programme on Justice and Governance in India and South Asia.

    Anthony Good is Emeritus Professor of Social Anthropology at the University of Edinburgh, and formerly Head of the School of Social & Political Science. His research interests cover Tamil Nadu (South India), and Sri Lanka. He frequently acts as an expert witness in asylum appeals involving Sri Lankan Tamils. His recent research concerns uses of expert evidence in British asylum courts, and (with Robert Gibb) a comparative study of asylum processes in the UK and France.

    Gilles Tarabout is Emeritus ‘Directeur de Recherche’ at the French National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS), and formerly head of the Centre for Ethnology and Comparative Sociology (LESC), at the University of Paris West-Nanterre. His research focuses especially on relationships between society and religion in Kerala (South India). He has recently been coordinating with Daniela Berti an international research programme funded by the Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR), entitled Just-India: A Joint Programme on Justice and Governance in India and South Asia.
Catégories: Comparative Law News

SERIES/BOOK: Global Law and Walker on Intimations of Global Law

Juris Diversitas - mer, 03/18/2015 - 08:58
A new Global Law Series has been announced at Cambridge:
The series provides unique perspectives on the way globalisation is radically altering the study, discipline and practice of law. Featuring innovative books in this growing field, the series explores those bodies of law which are becoming global in their application, and the newly emerging interdependency and interaction of different legal systems. It covers all major branches of the law and includes work on legal theory, history and the methodology of legal practice and jurisprudence under conditions of globalisation. Offering a major platform on global law, these books provide essential reading for students and scholars of comparative, international and transnational law.
Neil Walker’s Intimations of Global Law is the first text in the Series:
A strain of law reaching beyond any bounded international or transnational remit to assert a global jurisdiction has recently acquired a new prominence. Intimations of Global Law detects this strain in structures of international law claiming a planetary scope independent of state consent, in new threads of global constitutional law, administrative law and human rights, and in revived notions of ius gentium and the global rule of law. It is also visible in the legal pursuit of functionally differentiated global public goods, general conflict rules, norms of 'legal pluralism' and new legal hybrids such as the global law of peace and humanity law. The coming of global law affects how law manifests itself in a global age and alters the shape of our legal-ethical horizons. Global law presents a diverse, unsettled and sometimes conflicted legal category, and one which challenges our very understanding of the rudiments of legal authority.
Catégories: Comparative Law News

BOOK: "Il diavolo in Paradiso. Diritto, teologia e letteratura nel Processus Satane (sec. XIV)" by Beatrice Pasciuta (2015)

Beatrice Pasciuta (Professor of Legal History at the University of Palermo), Il diavolo in Paradiso. Diritto, teologia e letteratura nel Processus Satane (sec. XIV)
all information here
Il diavolo sale in Paradiso, deciso a riprendersi l’umanità utilizzando un nuovo formidabile strumento: il processo. Possibile? Composto nel XIV secolo, tramandato come opera giuridica falsamente attribuita a Bartolo da Sassoferrato, il Processus Satane è un processo simulato, in forma di dialogo, fra il diavolo, Cristo e la Madonna. Bollato come opera minore e pressoché ignorato dalla storiografia, il testo costituisce in realtà uno straordinario esempio di sincretismo culturale: il linguaggio della teologia serve al diritto come fonte di legittimazione, e di contro la costruzione escatologica e la stessa teoria della Salvezza sono impiantate su una struttura giuridica.In questa prospettiva, il Processus Satane viene qui riproposto come punto di osservazione ideale per cogliere le interazioni di una cultura poliedrica e complessa, insieme di teatro e di letteratura, di diritto e di teologia, di scuola e di piazza.

Catégories: Comparative Law News

JOURNAL: "Law, Crime and History" volume 5, issue 1 (2015)

Law, Crime and History Volume 5 Issue 1 (2015) - All information here
SPECIAL EDITION: OUR CRIMINAL PAST - CARING FOR THE FUTUREGuest Editors: Heather Shore and Helen JohnstonPreface: Barry Godfrey, 1-4Introduction:Heather Shore and Helen Johnston, ‘Thinking about the Future of Our Criminal Past’, 5-11
Digital Histories of CrimeSharon Howard, ‘Bloody Code: Reflecting on a Decade of the Old Bailey Online and the Digital Futures of Our Criminal Past’, 12-24
Hamish Maxwell Stewart, Matthew Cracknell, and Kris Inwood, ‘Height, Crime and Colonial History’, 25-42Blogging Crime HistoriesLucy Williams, ‘Writing Wayward Women: Why Blog the History of Victorian England’s Female Offenders?’ 43-53
Helen Rogers, ‘Blogging Our Criminal Past: Social Media, Public Engagement and Creative History’, 54-76Teaching Digital History

Zoe Alker, ‘The Digital Classroom: New Social Media and Teaching Victorian Crime’, 77-92
Andrew Davies, Mark Peel and Laura Balderstone, ‘Digital Histories of Crime and Research-Based Teaching and Learning’, 93-104Presenting Crime and Policing HistoriesBeth Wilburn, ‘Narrating ‘Our Criminal Past’ at Greater Manchester Police Museum and Archives in the Context of the UK Government Funded Tackling Knives Action Programme (TKAP) 2009-2011’, 105-116
Dorian Knight, ‘On the Beat: Stories from 1914-1918: A Fresh Approach to interpreting Crime History at Bishop’s Stortford Museum’, 117-129Debate and DiscussionRichard W. Ireland, ‘Why Everything We Know About Criminal Justice History is Wrong’, 130-142
Book ReviewsDavid J. Cox, ‘An Eye For An Eye: A Global History of Crime and Punishment’, 143-144Judith Rowbotham, ‘Sex, Crime and Literature in Victorian England’, 145-148Dean WilsonPolicing Twentieth Century Ireland: A History of An Garda Síochána, 149-151
Catégories: Comparative Law News