Preview

BRICS Law Journal

Advanced search

“BRICS LAW”: AN OXYMORON , OR FROM COO PERATION , VIA CON SOLIDATION , TO CODIFICATION?

https://doi.org/10.21684/2412-2343-2019-6-4-6-33

Full Text:

Abstract

In the global arena, the cooperation between the BRICS countries – Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa – covers around 42% of the world’s population and some of the world’s most dynamic emerging economies. Initially, the BRICS cooperation was suggested as an idea, and it was later welcomed as a new addition to the global governance debate about the future. The BRICS countries have already held ten consecutive summits of heads of state plus a large number of meetings at the ministerial level. The cooperation describes itself as a “cooperation and dialogue” platform, but it has nonetheless signed a number of binding treaties and, notably, established the New Development Bank (NDB) as a permanent institution headquartered in Shanghai (China).
The cooperation has also met with resistance, criticism and problems caused by the overall complexity of global affairs in a rapidly changing world. The diversity and remote locations of the BRICS countries have also been thought of as an obstacle to their successful cooperation and their ability to play an active part in global governance in the twentyfirst century. The main challenge thus lies in their ability to overcome their differences and to make a difference in designing the future global political and economic world order. Against the backdrop of the global governance debate, the present paper therefore asks whether the BRICS cooperation constitutes a novel model of regionalism with multilateral aspirations, and what role law and, notably, the “rule of law” can play in this important task. The paper includes a discussion of the extent to which the BRICS cooperation needs to be upgraded in legal and institutional terms, and possibly to proceed from cooperation via consolidation to the codification of its most important sources of global law.

About the Author

R. Neuwirth
University of Macau
China

Professor of Law, Head of Department of Global Legal Studies, Faculty of Law

E32, Avenida da Universidade, Taipa, Macau, China



References

1. Sykes A.O. Regulatory Competition or Regulatory Harmonization? A Silly Question?, 3(2) Journal of International Economic Law 257 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/3.2.257

2. Abramowicz M. Cryptocurrency-Based Law, 58(2) Arizona Law Review 359 (2016).

3. Tamanaha B.Z. On the Rule of Law: History, Politics, Theory (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004). https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511812378

4. Alvarez J.E. Are Corporations “Subjects” of International Law, 9(1) Santa Clara Journal of International Law 1 (2011).

5. The BRICS-Lawyers’ Guide to Global Cooperation (R.J. Neuwirth et al. (eds.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017). https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108236102

6. Arend A.C. Legal Rules and International Society (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999).

7. The Prospects of International Trade Regulation: From Fragmentation to Coherence (T. Cottier & P. Delimatsis (eds.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011). https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511792496

8. Ariely D. Predictably Irrational: The Hidden Forces That Shape Our Decisions (New York: HarperCollins, 2008).

9. The Rule of Law in an Era of Change (G.J. Andreopoulos et al. (eds.), Cham: Springer, 2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-89908-4

10. Baasch Andersen C. From Resource of Law to Source of Law: The Internet as a Source of Law in Unifying the Jurisprudence of the CISG, 3 Journal of Information Law & Technology (2004) (Oct. 1, 2019), available at https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/law/elj/jilt/2004_3/andersen.

11. Thomas R. Written in Stone? Liberty, Equality, Morality and the Codification of Law, 40(1) Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies 59 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2041-5370.1995.tb00464.x

12. Bahga A. & Madisetti V. Big Data Science & Analytics: A Hands-On Approach (Brooklyn Center: VTP, 2016).

13. Thumfart J. Ist das Zoon Politikon ein Oxymoron?: Zur Dekonstruktion des Begriffs von Biopolitik bei Giorgio Agamben auf der Grundlage einer Wiederlektüre des Aristoteles [Is Zoon Politikon an Oxymoron?: On the Deconstruction of the Giorgio Agamben’s Concept of Biopolitics on the Basis of Rereading Aristotle] (Saarbrücken: VDM Verlag Dr. Müller, 2008).

14. Barton J.H. Behind the Legal Explosion, 27(3) Stanford Law Review 567 (1975). https://doi.org/10.2307/1228327

15. Toepfer G. The Concept of Life in Synthetic Biology in Synthetic Biology Analysed: Tools for Discussion and Evaluation 71 (M. Engelhard (ed.), Cham: Springer, 2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-25145-5_4

16. Beausang F. Globalization and the BRICs: Why the BRICs Will Not Rule the World for Long (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012). https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137271600

17. Trachtman J.P. International Regulatory Competition, Externalization, and Jurisdiction, 34(1) Harvard International Law Journal 47 (1993).

18. Bond P. & Garcia A. Introduction in BRICS: An Anti-Capitalist Critique 1 (P. Bond & A. Garcia (eds.), London: Pluto Press, 2015).

19. Trebilcock M. & Howse R. Trade Liberalization and Regulatory Diversity: Reconciling Competitive Markets with Competitive Politics, 6(1) European Journal of Law and Economics 5 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008691106306

20. Bowker G.C. Memory Practices in the Sciences (Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press, 2006).

21. Waldron J. The Concept and the Rule of Law, 43(1) Georgia Law Review 5 (2008).

22. Brütsch C. & Papa M. Deconstructing the BRICS: Bargaining, Coalition, Imagined Community, or Geopolitical Fad?, 6(3) Chinese Journal of International Politics 299 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1093/cjip/pot009

23. Waldron J. The Rule of International Law, 30(1) Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy 30 (2006).

24. Castellucci I. Legal Hybridity in Hong Kong and Macau, 57(4) McGill Law Journal 665 (2012). https://doi.org/10.7202/1013028ar

25. Williams R.C. The One and Only Substantive Due Process Clause, 120(3) Yale Law Journal 408 (2010).

26. Chibundu M.O. Globalizing the Rule of Law: Some Thoughts at and on the Periphery, 7(1) Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies 79 (1999).

27. Zolo D. The Rule of Law: A Critical Appraisal in The Rule of Law: History, Theory and Criticism 3 (P. Costa & D. Zolo (eds.), Dordrecht: Springer, 2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-5745-8_1

28. Chrisley R. General Introduction: The Concept of Artificial Intelligence in Artificial Intelligence: Critical Concepts. Vol. 1 1 (R. Chrisley & S. Begeer (eds.), New York: Routledge, 2000).

29. Dixon M. et al. Cases & Materials on International Law (6th ed., Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016). https://doi.org/10.1093/he/9780198727644.001.0001

30. Dupuy P.-M. The Danger of Fragmentation or Unification of the International Legal System and the International Court of Justice, 31(4) New York University Journal of International Law and Politics 791 (1999).

31. Durovic M. & Janssen A. The Formation of Blockchain-based Smart Contracts in the Light of Contract Law, 26(6) European Review of Private Law 753 (2018).

32. Dworkin R. Taking Rights Seriously (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1978).

33. Dyzenhaus D. The Rule of (Administrative) Law in International Law, 68(3) Law & Contemporary Problems 127 (2005). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.692762

34. Ehlers E. & Krafft T. Managing Global Change: Earth System Science in the Anthropocene in Earth System Science in the Anthropocene 5 (E. Ehlers & T. Krafft (eds.), Berlin: Springer, 2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-26590-2_2

35. Ely J.W., Jr. The Oxymoron Reconsidered: Myth and Reality in the Origins of Substantive Due Process, 16(2) Constitutional Commentary 315 (1999).

36. Epstein R.A. Animals as Objects, or Subjects, of Rights in Animal Rights: Current Debates and New Directions 445 (C.R. Sunstein & M.C. Nussbaum (eds.), Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004). https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315262529-29

37. Fallon R.H., Jr. “The Rule of Law” as a Concept in Constitutional Discourse, 97(1) Columbia Law Review 1 (1997). https://doi.org/10.2307/1123446

38. Fellmeth A.X. & Horwitz M. Guide to Latin in International Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009). https://doi.org/10.1093/acref/9780195369380.001.0001

39. Fuentes C.I. Normative Plurality in International Law: A Theory of the Determination of Applicable Rules (Berlin: Springer, 2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43929-7

40. Gallie W.B. Essentially Contested Concepts, 56(1) Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 167 (1956). https://doi.org/10.1093/aristotelian/56.1.167

41. Gebser J. Ursprung und Gegenwart. Erster Teil (2nd ed., Schaffhausen: Novalis, 1999).

42. Gibbons T. Rhetoric; or, a View of Its Principal Tropes and Figures, in Their Origin and Powers (London: J. & W. Oliver, 1767).

43. Gidley J. The Future: A Very Short Introduction (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017). https://doi.org/10.1093/actrade/9780198735281.001.0001

44. Gitelman L. & Jackson V. Introduction in “Raw Data” Is an Oxymoron 1 (L. Gitelman (ed.), Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press, 2013). https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9302.003.0002

45. Gleick J. Faster: The Acceleration of Just About Everything (New York: Vintage Books, 2000).

46. Glenn H.P. Legal Traditions of the World: Sustainable Diversity in Law (5th ed., Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014). https://doi.org/10.1093/he/9780199669837.001.0001

47. Glenn H.P. Persuasive Authority, 32(2) McGill Law Journal 286 (1987).

48. Glenn H.P. The Grounding of Codification, 31 U.C. Davis Law Review 765 (1999).

49. Handy C. The Age of Paradox (Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1995).

50. Heldrich A. The Deluge of Norms, 6(2) Boston College International and Comparative Law Review 377 (1983).

51. High-Speed Society: Social Acceleration, Power and Modernity (H. Rosa & W.E. Scheuerman (eds.), University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2009).

52. Hudson M.O. The First Conference for the Codification of International Law, 24(2) American Journal of International Law 367 (1930). https://doi.org/10.1017/s0002930000180224

53. International Governance and the Rule of Law in China Under the Belt and Road Initiative (Y. Zhao (ed.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018). https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108332651

54. Janis M.W. Individuals as Subjects of International Law, 17(1) Cornell International Law Journal 61 (1984). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1101693

55. Jeutner V. Irresolvable Norm Conflicts in International Law: The Concept of a Legal Dilemma (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017). https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198808374.001.0001

56. Johnson M.L. Mind, Metaphor, Law, 58(3) Mercer Law Review 845 (2007).

57. Kammerhofer J. Uncertainty in the Formal Sources of International Law: Customary International Law and Some of Its Problems, 15(3) European Journal of International Law 523 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/15.3.523

58. Kapur N.et al. The Paradoxical Nature of Nature in The Paradoxical Brain 1 (N. Kapur (ed.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011). https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511978098.003

59. Kennedy D. The Mystery of Global Governance, 34(3) Ohio Northern University Law Review 831 (2008).

60. Kern S. The Culture of Time and Space 1880–1918 (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1983).

61. Lapp J.A. Codification and Revision of Statutes, 8(4) American Political Science Review 629 (1914).

62. Lauterpacht H. Codification and Development of International Law, 49(1) American Journal of International Law 16 (1955). https://doi.org/10.2307/2194097

63. Lee T.V. Media Products as Law: The Mass Media as Enforcers and Sources of Law in China, 39(3) Denver Journal of International Law & Policy 437 (2011).

64. Macey J.R. Regulatory Globalization as a Response to Regulatory Competition, 52 Emory Law Journal 1353 (2003).

65. Maxeiner J.R. Some Realism About Legal Certainty in the Globalization of the Rule of Law, 31(1) Houston Journal of International Law 27 (2008).

66. McLuhan M. The Gutenberg Galaxy: The Making of Typographic Man (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1962).

67. Murphy J.F. The Evolving Dimensions of International Law: Hard Choices for the World Community (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010). https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511750687

68. Negoita C.V. Cybernetics and Society, 11(2) Kybernetes 97 (1982). https://doi.org/10.1108/eb005611

69. Neuwirth R.J. & Svetlicinii A. The BRICS-Lawyers’ Guide to BRICS Texts and Materials (Macau: BRICS-Lawyers, 2019).

70. Nijman J.E. Images of Grotius, Or the International Rule of Law Beyond Historiographical Oscillation, 17(1) Journal of the History of International Law 83 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1163/15718050-12340039

71. Oppetit B. Les tendances régressives dans l’évolution du droit contemporain [Regressive Trends in the Evolution of Contemporary Law] in Mélanges dédiés à Dominique Holleaux [Essays in Honour of Dominique Holleaux] 317 (J.-F. Pillebout (ed.), Paris: Litec, 1990).

72. Orts E.W. The Rule of Law in China, 34(1) Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law 43 (2001).

73. Rescher N. Predicting the Future: An Introduction to the Theory of Forecasting (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1998).

74. Rolland S.E. The BRICS’ Contributions to the Architecture and Norms of International Economic Law, 107 Proceedings of the ASIL Annual Meeting 164 (2013). https://doi.org/10.5305/procannmeetasil.107.0164

75. Rosenau J.N. Governance in the 21st Century, 1(1) Global Governance 13 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1163/19426720-001-01-90000004

76. Rosett A. Unification, Harmonization, Restatement, Codification, and Reform in International Commercial Law, 40(3) American Journal of Comparative Law 683 (1992). https://doi.org/10.2307/840594

77. Sassen S. The Participation of States and Citizens in Global Governance, 10(1) Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies 5 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1353/gls.2003.0015

78. Scaffardi L. BRICS, a Multi-Centre “Legal Network”?, 5(2) Beijing Law Review 140 (2014). https://doi.org/10.4236/blr.2014.52013

79. Schauer F. Necessity, Importance, and the Nature of Law in Neutrality and Theory of Law 17 (J. Ferrer Beltrán et al. (eds.), Dordrecht: Springer, 2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6067-7_2

80. Scholz L.H. Algorithmic Contracts, 20(2) Stanford Technology Law Review 165 (2017).

81. Schwartmann R. Private im Wirtschaftsvölkerrecht [Private Persons and Companies in International Economic Law] (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005).

82. Steffen W. et al. The Anthropocene: Are Humans Now Overwhelming the Great Forces of Nature?, 36(8) AM BIO: A Journal of the Human Environment 614 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1579/0044-7447(2007)36[614:taahno]2.0.co;2

83. Stone C.D. Should Trees Have Standing? – Toward Legal Rights for Natural Objects, 45(2) Southern California Law Review 450 (1972).

84. Stone C.D. Should Trees Have Standing? Law, Morality, and the Environment (3rd ed., Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010).

85. Sykes A.O. Regulatory Competition or Regulatory Harmonization? A Silly Question?, 3(2) Journal of International Economic Law 257 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/3.2.257

86. Tamanaha B.Z. On the Rule of Law: History, Politics, Theory (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004). https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511812378

87. The BRICS-Lawyers’ Guide to Global Cooperation (R.J. Neuwirth et al. (eds.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017). https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108236102

88. The Prospects of International Trade Regulation: From Fragmentation to Coherence (T. Cottier & P. Delimatsis (eds.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011). https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511792496

89. The Rule of Law in an Era of Change (G.J. Andreopoulos et al. (eds.), Cham: Springer, 2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-89908-4

90. Thomas R. Written in Stone? Liberty, Equality, Morality and the Codification of Law, 40(1) Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies 59 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2041-5370.1995.tb00464.x

91. Thumfart J. Ist das Zoon Politikon ein Oxymoron?: Zur Dekonstruktion des Begriffs von Biopolitik bei Giorgio Agamben auf der Grundlage einer Wiederlektüre des Aristoteles [Is Zoon Politikon an Oxymoron?: On the Deconstruction of the Giorgio Agamben’s Concept of Biopolitics on the Basis of Rereading Aristotle] (Saarbrücken: VDM Verlag Dr. Müller, 2008).

92. Toepfer G. The Concept of Life in Synthetic Biology in Synthetic Biology Analysed: Tools for Discussion and Evaluation 71 (M. Engelhard (ed.), Cham: Springer, 2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-25145-5_4

93. Trachtman J.P. International Regulatory Competition, Externalization, and Jurisdiction, 34(1) Harvard International Law Journal 47 (1993).

94. Trebilcock M. & Howse R. Trade Liberalization and Regulatory Diversity: Reconciling Competitive Markets with Competitive Politics, 6(1) European Journal of Law and Economics 5 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008691106306

95. Waldron J. The Concept and the Rule of Law, 43(1) Georgia Law Review 5 (2008).

96. Waldron J. The Rule of International Law, 30(1) Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy 30 (2006).

97. Williams R.C. The One and Only Substantive Due Process Clause, 120(3) Yale Law Journal 408 (2010).

98. Zolo D. The Rule of Law: A Critical Appraisal in The Rule of Law: History, Theory and Criticism 3 (P. Costa & D. Zolo (eds.), Dordrecht: Springer, 2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-5745-8_1


For citation:


Neuwirth R. “BRICS LAW”: AN OXYMORON , OR FROM COO PERATION , VIA CON SOLIDATION , TO CODIFICATION?. BRICS Law Journal. 2019;6(4):6-33. https://doi.org/10.21684/2412-2343-2019-6-4-6-33

Views: 70


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.


ISSN 2409-9058 (Print)
ISSN 2412-2343 (Online)