Pub Date : 2021-09-02DOI: 10.1080/07329113.2021.2018158
{"title":"From the editors: celebrating the 40th anniversary of journal of legal pluralism and unofficial law","authors":"","doi":"10.1080/07329113.2021.2018158","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07329113.2021.2018158","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":44432,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2021-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79928100","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-21DOI: 10.1080/07329113.2021.1953231
M. Constable
{"title":"Affective Justice: The International Criminal Court and the Pan-Africanist Pushback","authors":"M. Constable","doi":"10.1080/07329113.2021.1953231","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07329113.2021.1953231","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":44432,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2021-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73554029","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-30DOI: 10.1080/07329113.2021.1949898
P. Werbner
ABSTRACT Against legal scepticism which constructs litigations as negative or useless ‘lawfare’, this article argues for the need to recognise that taking government to court is part of a wider strategy of social mobilisation and campaigns for social justice, as others have also claimed. Legal mobilisation during a public sector strike in Botswana in 2011 was, the paper argues, only one strategic part of a more comprehensive campaign to call on government to pay its workers a living wage. The paper calls for anthropology to re-examine some of its assumptions about the role of the law in postcolonial nations. Despite the possibility that judges may be biased or vulnerable to political influence, and despite the courts’ restricted ability to implement their judgements - it is nevertheless the case that ethics, morality and the law, when mobilised alongside concerted political and civic activism, may play a critical role in advancing the cause of citizens’ rights against an apparently all-powerful government.
{"title":"Legal mobilisation, legal scepticism and the limits of ‘lawfare’: between law and politics in union activism in Botswana","authors":"P. Werbner","doi":"10.1080/07329113.2021.1949898","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07329113.2021.1949898","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Against legal scepticism which constructs litigations as negative or useless ‘lawfare’, this article argues for the need to recognise that taking government to court is part of a wider strategy of social mobilisation and campaigns for social justice, as others have also claimed. Legal mobilisation during a public sector strike in Botswana in 2011 was, the paper argues, only one strategic part of a more comprehensive campaign to call on government to pay its workers a living wage. The paper calls for anthropology to re-examine some of its assumptions about the role of the law in postcolonial nations. Despite the possibility that judges may be biased or vulnerable to political influence, and despite the courts’ restricted ability to implement their judgements - it is nevertheless the case that ethics, morality and the law, when mobilised alongside concerted political and civic activism, may play a critical role in advancing the cause of citizens’ rights against an apparently all-powerful government.","PeriodicalId":44432,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2021-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87336383","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-24DOI: 10.1080/07329113.2021.1951483
João Vitor Cardoso, Millaray Rayen Pacheco-Pizarro
Experiences in Andean countries reveal that constitutional recognition of plural rights systems is not enough to reduce the detrimental impacts of hydropower on Indigenous communities. In this arti...
安第斯国家的经验表明，宪法承认多元权利制度不足以减少水电对土著社区的有害影响。在这篇文章中……
{"title":"Water rights, indigenous legal mobilization and the hybridization of legal pluralism in Southern Chile","authors":"João Vitor Cardoso, Millaray Rayen Pacheco-Pizarro","doi":"10.1080/07329113.2021.1951483","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07329113.2021.1951483","url":null,"abstract":"Experiences in Andean countries reveal that constitutional recognition of plural rights systems is not enough to reduce the detrimental impacts of hydropower on Indigenous communities. In this arti...","PeriodicalId":44432,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2021-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84921062","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-04DOI: 10.1080/07329113.2021.1957432
D. Roth
For almost one and a half year, the world has been in the grip of the COVID pandemic, confronting people worldwide with a wide variety of unexpected health, social, economic, legal, political and other impacts on their daily lives and lifeworlds. COVID took the world by surprise and totally unprepared; the rich parts of the world more interested in business-as-usual and economic growth than in disaster-preparedness, despite earlier wake-up calls like ebola, SARS, Q-fever and many others. Those who read David Quammen’s Spillover, published in 2013, could have known. Sociologically COVID can be seen as a life-changing “event,” a rupture that creates a “before” and an “after.” However, it does so differently for various people in different parts of the world and positioned differently socially, economically and otherwise. The outbreak and spread of the COVID pandemic does not only reveal the human vulnerability to and unpreparedness for pandemics, but also lays bare the deeper social, political and other fault lines, sensitivities and conflicts that tend to remain hidden under “normal” conditions. While in most countries COVID was acknowledged to be a serious threat, in some it was disregarded for political-ideological reasons (e.g. the United States during the Trump administration; Bolsonaro’s Brazil) or it was even forbidden to mention it (Tanzania under John Magufuli). Governing the COVID crisis is a matter of trial and error. While it took time to find out what works in combatting the pandemic, the three cases mentioned above have clearly shown what does not work, what bad governance of the pandemic looks like, and what the consequences of denial and disregard are in terms of human suffering. Many COVID-related measures have raised important constitutional, legal and justice issues. COVID has become the legitimizing argument for forms of securitization, centralization of powers and the creation of “states of exception,” expressed through emergency laws, policies and interventions. In Hongkong, for instance, COVID created a window of opportunity for those in power to forbid demonstrations against Beijing’s growing influence and thus to eliminate political opposition. In a world preoccupied with combatting the pandemic, authoritarian regimes more generally seem to have benefited from fear of contamination, reduced social interaction, and the ban on mass meetings and demonstrations. But the pandemic has raised many other political, legal and justice issues. Globally, the huge inequalities in access to pharmaceutical production infrastructure and the markets for vaccines dominated by rich countries have created unacceptable distributional inequalities and massive vulnerabilities. While rich countries bought up the lions’ share of global vaccine production, many poor countries, especially in Africa, stand by and remain dependent on gifts by other countries. Moreover, COVID
{"title":"From the editors: research in times of COVID","authors":"D. Roth","doi":"10.1080/07329113.2021.1957432","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07329113.2021.1957432","url":null,"abstract":"For almost one and a half year, the world has been in the grip of the COVID pandemic, confronting people worldwide with a wide variety of unexpected health, social, economic, legal, political and other impacts on their daily lives and lifeworlds. COVID took the world by surprise and totally unprepared; the rich parts of the world more interested in business-as-usual and economic growth than in disaster-preparedness, despite earlier wake-up calls like ebola, SARS, Q-fever and many others. Those who read David Quammen’s Spillover, published in 2013, could have known. Sociologically COVID can be seen as a life-changing “event,” a rupture that creates a “before” and an “after.” However, it does so differently for various people in different parts of the world and positioned differently socially, economically and otherwise. The outbreak and spread of the COVID pandemic does not only reveal the human vulnerability to and unpreparedness for pandemics, but also lays bare the deeper social, political and other fault lines, sensitivities and conflicts that tend to remain hidden under “normal” conditions. While in most countries COVID was acknowledged to be a serious threat, in some it was disregarded for political-ideological reasons (e.g. the United States during the Trump administration; Bolsonaro’s Brazil) or it was even forbidden to mention it (Tanzania under John Magufuli). Governing the COVID crisis is a matter of trial and error. While it took time to find out what works in combatting the pandemic, the three cases mentioned above have clearly shown what does not work, what bad governance of the pandemic looks like, and what the consequences of denial and disregard are in terms of human suffering. Many COVID-related measures have raised important constitutional, legal and justice issues. COVID has become the legitimizing argument for forms of securitization, centralization of powers and the creation of “states of exception,” expressed through emergency laws, policies and interventions. In Hongkong, for instance, COVID created a window of opportunity for those in power to forbid demonstrations against Beijing’s growing influence and thus to eliminate political opposition. In a world preoccupied with combatting the pandemic, authoritarian regimes more generally seem to have benefited from fear of contamination, reduced social interaction, and the ban on mass meetings and demonstrations. But the pandemic has raised many other political, legal and justice issues. Globally, the huge inequalities in access to pharmaceutical production infrastructure and the markets for vaccines dominated by rich countries have created unacceptable distributional inequalities and massive vulnerabilities. While rich countries bought up the lions’ share of global vaccine production, many poor countries, especially in Africa, stand by and remain dependent on gifts by other countries. Moreover, COVID","PeriodicalId":44432,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2021-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84053188","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-04DOI: 10.1080/07329113.2021.1942606
B. Tamanaha
Abstract This essay conveys past and present legally plural situations across the Global South, highlighting critical issues. It provide readers a deep sense of legal pluralism and an appreciation of its complexity and the consequences that follow. A brief overview of colonization sets the stage, followed by an extended discussion of colonial indirect rule, which formed the basis for political and legal pluralism. Thereafter, I discuss in order, the transformation-invention of customary law, socially embedded village courts, the enhancement of the power of traditional elites, uncertainty and conflict over land, clashes between customary and religious law and women’s right and human rights, the recent turn to non-state law by development agencies, and the entrenched structure of legal pluralism. Notwithstanding innumerable variations and changes across locations and over time, the essay shows that legal pluralism across the Global South constitutes a distinct, enduring social-historical formation with shared structural features that must be understood on its own terms. The essay is written for scholars, government officials, international development agencies, and law and development theorists and practitioners interested in law in postcolonial societies.
{"title":"Legal pluralism across the global South: colonial origins and contemporary consequences","authors":"B. Tamanaha","doi":"10.1080/07329113.2021.1942606","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07329113.2021.1942606","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This essay conveys past and present legally plural situations across the Global South, highlighting critical issues. It provide readers a deep sense of legal pluralism and an appreciation of its complexity and the consequences that follow. A brief overview of colonization sets the stage, followed by an extended discussion of colonial indirect rule, which formed the basis for political and legal pluralism. Thereafter, I discuss in order, the transformation-invention of customary law, socially embedded village courts, the enhancement of the power of traditional elites, uncertainty and conflict over land, clashes between customary and religious law and women’s right and human rights, the recent turn to non-state law by development agencies, and the entrenched structure of legal pluralism. Notwithstanding innumerable variations and changes across locations and over time, the essay shows that legal pluralism across the Global South constitutes a distinct, enduring social-historical formation with shared structural features that must be understood on its own terms. The essay is written for scholars, government officials, international development agencies, and law and development theorists and practitioners interested in law in postcolonial societies.","PeriodicalId":44432,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2021-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77781429","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-04DOI: 10.1080/07329113.2021.1945222
Tody Sasmitha Jiwa Utama
Abstract The initiative to recognize and incorporate customary law into the state system is now a ubiquitous phenomenon. However, how and for what purposes such incorporation has to be performed is still a heated debate. Using the case of the Indonesian Bill of Criminal Code (BCC), this article examines how the government uses its law-making power to utilize customary law (adat law) and the legal and political benefits the state could earn from such utilization. I argue that, by constructing adat law as ‘living law’ and using it as the basis for criminal conviction, the BCC has continued its romantic, but legalistic, approach in managing legal pluralism. This article envisions that such incorporation will freeze the dynamic character of adat law, allowing the state to entrench its domination and create a false sense of security in responding to Indonesia’s legal pluralism challenges. Therefore, the state recognition of adat law can distort and undermined adat law as an empirical phenomenon.
{"title":"Between adat law and living law: an illusion of customary law incorporation into Indonesia penal system","authors":"Tody Sasmitha Jiwa Utama","doi":"10.1080/07329113.2021.1945222","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07329113.2021.1945222","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The initiative to recognize and incorporate customary law into the state system is now a ubiquitous phenomenon. However, how and for what purposes such incorporation has to be performed is still a heated debate. Using the case of the Indonesian Bill of Criminal Code (BCC), this article examines how the government uses its law-making power to utilize customary law (adat law) and the legal and political benefits the state could earn from such utilization. I argue that, by constructing adat law as ‘living law’ and using it as the basis for criminal conviction, the BCC has continued its romantic, but legalistic, approach in managing legal pluralism. This article envisions that such incorporation will freeze the dynamic character of adat law, allowing the state to entrench its domination and create a false sense of security in responding to Indonesia’s legal pluralism challenges. Therefore, the state recognition of adat law can distort and undermined adat law as an empirical phenomenon.","PeriodicalId":44432,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2021-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87265223","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-04DOI: 10.1080/07329113.2021.1890429
Keebet von Benda-Beckmann
What have punks and skins to do with legal pluralism? This is one of the issues that Aimar Ventsel addresses in his remarkable study of punks and skins, situated in the medium-sized town of Halle i...
{"title":"Aimar ventsel 2020 punks and skins: identity, class & the economics of an Eastern german subculture","authors":"Keebet von Benda-Beckmann","doi":"10.1080/07329113.2021.1890429","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07329113.2021.1890429","url":null,"abstract":"What have punks and skins to do with legal pluralism? This is one of the issues that Aimar Ventsel addresses in his remarkable study of punks and skins, situated in the medium-sized town of Halle i...","PeriodicalId":44432,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2021-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77071207","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-04DOI: 10.1080/07329113.2021.1925459
I. Shahar
Abstract Based on semi-structured, in-depth interviews with Arab-Palestinian sulha mediators in the Galilee, the article explores different forms of dispute resolution used for resolving matrimonial and familial disputes in this community. The “customary” sulha mechanism is shown to be highly heterogeneous in nature. Furthermore, it is argued that different modes of sulha reflect and embody different models of relationship between the Israeli state and the Arab-Palestinian minority. These modes are presented and discussed in the article.
{"title":"Diversity in sulha practices among Arab-Palestinians in Israel and its implications for state–minority relations: a pluri-legal perspective","authors":"I. Shahar","doi":"10.1080/07329113.2021.1925459","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07329113.2021.1925459","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Based on semi-structured, in-depth interviews with Arab-Palestinian sulha mediators in the Galilee, the article explores different forms of dispute resolution used for resolving matrimonial and familial disputes in this community. The “customary” sulha mechanism is shown to be highly heterogeneous in nature. Furthermore, it is argued that different modes of sulha reflect and embody different models of relationship between the Israeli state and the Arab-Palestinian minority. These modes are presented and discussed in the article.","PeriodicalId":44432,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2021-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77260506","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-04DOI: 10.1080/07329113.2021.1912579
T. D. Wirastri, S. V. van Huis
Abstract This paper explores how legal and value pluralism creates or constrains space for second wives to express ambivalences towards negative aspects of their unregistered polygamous marriages. It analyses two types of ambivalence toward dominant Muslim family law norms: first, ambivalence toward dominant norms pertaining to the second wives’ status and roles within a polygamous marriage; and, second, ambivalence toward state regulation of Muslim marriage as exhibited within the Indonesian Islamic courts and Offices of Religious Affairs. The three case studies will show how second wives express ambivalence towards their inequal social position to the first wife, lack of support by their husband, social stigma, and lacking marital status. In expressing these ambivalences, they do not engage in oppositional discourses, or “hidden transcripts”, yet show their discontent towards certain aspects of their polygamous marriage while referring to alternative norms. This paper links this ambivalence toward social practice of polygamy to ambivalence on the state level, as exhibited through lenience, accommodation, and facilitation of unregistered polygamous marriage. We believe that an investigation of ambivalence from these two different perspectives is an apt way to uncover the loci where the clash of norm in the context of unregistered polygamy are the most profound.
{"title":"The second wife: Ambivalences towards state regulation of polygamy in Indonesia","authors":"T. D. Wirastri, S. V. van Huis","doi":"10.1080/07329113.2021.1912579","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07329113.2021.1912579","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper explores how legal and value pluralism creates or constrains space for second wives to express ambivalences towards negative aspects of their unregistered polygamous marriages. It analyses two types of ambivalence toward dominant Muslim family law norms: first, ambivalence toward dominant norms pertaining to the second wives’ status and roles within a polygamous marriage; and, second, ambivalence toward state regulation of Muslim marriage as exhibited within the Indonesian Islamic courts and Offices of Religious Affairs. The three case studies will show how second wives express ambivalence towards their inequal social position to the first wife, lack of support by their husband, social stigma, and lacking marital status. In expressing these ambivalences, they do not engage in oppositional discourses, or “hidden transcripts”, yet show their discontent towards certain aspects of their polygamous marriage while referring to alternative norms. This paper links this ambivalence toward social practice of polygamy to ambivalence on the state level, as exhibited through lenience, accommodation, and facilitation of unregistered polygamous marriage. We believe that an investigation of ambivalence from these two different perspectives is an apt way to uncover the loci where the clash of norm in the context of unregistered polygamy are the most profound.","PeriodicalId":44432,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2021-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86967653","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：