• November 28, 2022
  • ychan
  • Uncategorized
  • 0

This article examines the relevance of global spatial legal pluralism – an emerging field at the intersection of geography, anthropology and social law studies – for the study of the global land rush and, in particular, for the study of land and investment law. I argue that the focus on the spatial dimensions of law – coupled with the attention to interlegality, scalar politics, and spatio-temporal temporalities of semi-autonomous law – offers important insights into the dynamic forces, actors, and challenges of the global land frenzy. In Myanmar, prospects for peace – however dim – have led to an acceleration in the development of land rights, including the creation of a “semi-autonomous land law” by ethnic armed groups and militants in border areas. I discuss how such policies not only anticipate peace, but also attempt to shape their political economy through multiple spatial temporalities. By recognizing both international human rights law and customary law, these “non-state” laws bring these two scales into an intermediate jurisdiction and contribute to the sedimentation of Kawthoolei and Kachinland as distinct political scales. Global legal pluralism imposes three requirements on law: 1) law includes both state and non-state law; 2) there are a variety of laws; 3) Laws overlap and interact in certain ways. Of these, the third is the most difficult and at the same time the least theorized. Pluralists do not have the tools to deal with it. The main reason is that, with rare exceptions, they ignore conflicts of laws as a discipline that deals with such overlaps and interactions. As a result, discussions have stalled: global legal pluralism is widely accepted as a useful description of law around the world, but in the absence of a more precise conceptualization and theory, this description has little impact on further analysis.

This chapter, forthcoming in the Oxford Handbook of Global Legal Pluralism, presents conflict-of-laws norms as a technique and discipline for scholars of global pluralists. And it explains why conflict of laws is doctrinaire and epistemologically the appropriate discipline to deal with overlaps and interactions of laws in global legal pluralism. Because of his experience, conflict of laws is superior to other diversity management techniques. Moreover, it is superior to other epistemologies due to a number of its properties, including its decentralized character, technical character, and ethical position. Scholars dealing with global legal pluralism would do well to approach it more holistically. In [almost all analyses of global legal pluralism] that I have encountered so far, I have always noticed that the author proceeds for some time according to the usual methods of reasoning and asserts [the existence of a “global legal pluralism”] or makes remarks on human affairs [of the “world Bukovina” on international human affairs]; When I am suddenly surprised to find that instead of the usual copulations of sentences, there is and there is not a sentence that is not related to a target or a homework. This change is imperceptible; is of an ultimate consequence. (Hume 1738, Book III, Part I, chap. I) This article refers to David Hume`s powerful insight and aims to remind us of the need to make a clear distinction between global legal pluralism to describe recent factual developments and, for example, to draw attention to the massive increase in international actors, norms and tribunals as well as arbitrators on the one hand. And on the other hand, as another question, the question of how we should deal with or even resolve these legal conflicts (on the basis of a (common) framework) that arise from these plural and overlapping legal claims. The “normative movement” in the global debate on legal pluralism requires sufficient justification for its normative demands.

This article concludes that the division between is and should best be respected if prescriptive proposals for resolving legal conflicts are not labeled “pluralistic.” Rather, I would say that it is more accurate to speak of a necessarily common framework that deals with the question of how these conflicts should be resolved collectively or at least in a manner acceptable to all parties. Finally, this article notes that this common framework is highly context-dependent. Therefore, solutions are more likely to be found when we focus on specific contexts rather than resorting to one-size-fits-all solutions for different situations. Some of the challenges of legal globalization are very similar to those formulated previously for legal pluralism: the irreducible plurality of legal systems, the coexistence of national law with other legal systems, the absence of a hierarchically superior position that transcends differences. This review deals with how legal pluralism deals with legal globalization and how legal globalization uses legal pluralism. It shows how several international legal disciplines —comparative law, conflict of laws, international law and European Union law— have slowly begun to adopt certain ideas of legal pluralism. It shows how the traditional themes and issues of legal pluralism — the definition of law, the role of the State, the community and space are — changed under the conditions of globalization. It deals with the interrelations between different legal systems and the different theoretical and practical ways of dealing with them. And it provides insight into the future of global legal pluralism as a theory and practice of global law. Law and society: Public law – Constitutional law eJournal Keywords: State, Community, International law, Comparative law, Conflict of laws, Recognition.

Revue d`histoire économique et sociale de l`Orient, 55/4-5 (2012) Annual Review of Law & Social Science, Vol. 5, 2009 Duke Law School Public Law & Legal Theory Series No. 2019-32. 20 pages Published: 15 May 2019 Last revised: 5 Jul 2019 Subscribe to this free journal for more curated articles on this topic Available from: scholarship.law.duke.edu/faculty_scholarship/2051 Ralf Michaels, Global Legal Pluralism, 5 Annual Review of Law & Social Science 1-35 (2009) Oxford Handbook of Global Legal Pluralism (forthcoming).