SYSTEMATIZATION OF LAW: THE BRICS CONTEXT AND BEYOND
Abstract
The present paper deals with the theoretical question of how can be warranted unity of legal system in the perspective of building up a new legal order of the BRICS. The author draws on the contemporary theories considering various aspects of explanation and construction of law as of a logically united system. Among such aspects are logical unity of legal propositions, epistemological unity of the phenomena unified under the term ‘law,’ factual unity of societal regulation, axiological unity of a hierarchy of legal values, procedural unity of legal reasoning, synergetic unison. It is asserted that the idea of unity of law is not something conceptually monolithic and allows for different readings, none of which can claim to be exhaustive. The author suggests that the BRICS does not need follow the track of systematization of the legislation of the Member States and that creating agglomerations of legal texts from different legal orders of the Member States is an issue not for politician but rather for legal scholars who can construct and reconstruct legal texts, jointing and disjointing them in the view of practical needs of amelioration of legal technique.
Keywords
About the Author
M. Antonov
Higher School of economics, St. Petersburg
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Mikhail Antonov (St. Petersburg, Russia) – Associate Professor at Department of Theory and History of Law and State, National Research university – Higher School of Economics
(16 Soyuza Pechatnikov str., St. Petersburg, 190121, Russia)
References
1. Alchourrón, Carlos E., & Bulygin, Eugenio. Normative Systems 123 (Springer 1971). Baistrocchi, Eduardo A. The International Tax Regime and the BRIC World: Elements for a Theory, 33(4) Oxford J. Legal Stud. (2013). doi:10.1093/ojls/gqt012
2. Bourdieu, Pierre. The Force of Law: Toward a Sociology of the Juridical Field, 38 Hastings L.J. 805 (1987), available at <http://www.soc.ucsb.edu/ct/pages/JWM/Syllabi/Bourdieu/ForceofLaw.pdf> (accessed Aug. 5, 2015).
3. Bulygin, Eugenio. On Legal Interpretation, in 4 Rechtssystem und praktische Vernunft / Legal System and Practical Reason: Verhandlungen des XV. Weltkongresses für Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie (IVR), göttingen, 18. bis 24. August 1991 (= 53 Archiv für Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie – Beihefte (ARSP-B)) (Hans-Joachim Koch & ulfrid Neumann, eds.) 11, 20–22 (Franz Steiner Verlag 1993).
4. Bulygin, Eugenio. Time and Validity, in: 2 Deontic Logic, Computational Linguistics and Legal Information Systems 65 (Antonio A. Martino, ed.) (Elsevier Science Ltd. 1982).
5. Burke-White, William W. Power Shifts in International Law: Structural Realignment and Substantive Pluralism, 56(1) Harv. Int’l L.J. (2015).
6. Carducci, Michele, & Bruno, Anna S. The BRICS Countries As a Legal Dynamic Network and the Multilevel ‘Hard’ EU Regional Structure – a Comparative Survey, 4(1) Int’l J. Pub. L. & Pol’y (2014), available at <http://www.inderscienceonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1504/IJPLAP.2014.057882> (accessed Aug. 5, 2015). doi:10.1504/IJPLAP.2014.057882
7. Dworkin, Ronald. Law’s Empire 87–88, 225 (Harvard university Press 1986), available at <http://www.filosoficas.unam.mx/~cruzparc/empire.pdf> (accessed Aug. 5, 2015).
8. Furton, Edward J. Restoring the Hierarchy of Values to Thomistic Natural Law, in: 39(1) Am. J. Juris. (1994), available at <http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1195&context=ajj> (accessed Aug. 5, 2015).
9. Kripke, Saul A. Naming and Necessity (Harvard university Press 1982). MacCormick, Neil. Coherence in Legal Justification, in Theory of Legal Science:
10. Proceedings of the Conference on Legal Theory and Philosophy of Science, Lund, Sweden, December 11–14, 1983 (= 176 Synthese Library) 235 (Alexander Peczenik et al., eds.) (D. Reidel Pub. Co. 1984).
11. Peczenik, Alexander. Law, Morality, Coherence and Truth, 7(2) Ratio Juris (1994). doi:10.1111/j.1467-9337.1994.tb00174.x
12. Putnam, Hilary. Reason, Truth and History 41 ff. (Cambridge university Press 1981).
13. Raz, Joseph. From Normativity to Responsibility (Oxford university Press 2011). doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199693818.001.0001
14. Raz, Joseph. The Identity of Legal Systems, in Joseph Raz, The Authority of Law: Essays on Law and Morality 78 (Clarendon Press 1979). doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198253457.003.0005
15. Raz, Joseph. The Relevance of Coherence, in: Joseph Raz, Ethics in Public Domain: Essays in the Morality of Law and Politics (Clarendon Press 1994). doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198260691.003.0013
16. Stone, Julius. Legal System and Lawyers’ Reasonings (Stanford university Press 1964).
17. Teubner, gunter. How the Law Thinks: Toward a Constructivist Epistemology of Law, 23(5) Law & Soc’y Rev. (1989), available at <http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract_id=896502> (accessed Aug. 5, 2015).
18. The Logic of Legal Requirements: Essays on Defeasibility (Jordi F. Beltrán & giovanni B. Ratti, eds.) (Oxford university Press 2012).
19. Waldron, Jeremy. ‘Transcendental Nonsense’ and System in the Law, 100 Colum. L. Rev. 16, 19 (fn. 14), available at <http://emoglen.law.columbia.edu/persp/waldron-cohen.pdf> (accessed Aug. 5, 2015).
Supporting agencies: Russian Fund of Humanities; National Research university – Higher School of Economics’ Academic Fund
For citation:
Antonov M. SYSTEMATIZATION OF LAW: THE BRICS CONTEXT AND BEYOND. BRICS Law Journal. 2015;2(1):7-14. https://doi.org/10.21684/2412-2343-2015-2-1-48-50
Views: 686
Email this article 