公法、不稳定与诉诸司法

Amnon Lev
{"title":"公法、不稳定与诉诸司法","authors":"Amnon Lev","doi":"10.2979/indjglolegstu.27.1.0035","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Equality before the law is an axiom of public law, perhaps the most fundamental public law axiom of all. Our commitment to this equality is deepened by the knowledge that it does not map perfectly onto social reality. Because people are not equal in rank and privilege, precisely because they are not afforded the same opportunities, or rather the same opportunity to take advantage of opportunity, we must provide equal access to justice for those that lack a voice in society: the poor, the marginalized, the “deviants.” Seen in that perspective, access to justice is an unconditional good. In this paper I shall attempt to nuance that belief by showing that, in addition to making us equal before the law, public law systems generate precarity. Public law systems do so by distributing access to justice in ways that make certain groups in society easy prey for those more powerful than themselves. The most obvious implications of the argument concern the constitutional sphere. But its most momentous implications may show themselves beyond that sphere. As the idea of the rule of law spreads around the world, driven by governance reforms and by the efforts of human rights advocates, the mechanisms of inand exclusion that underpin the operation of public law spread with it, reproducing on a global scale the social dynamics that generate inequality within the polities that law orders. As we shall see, public law may be one of the links that tie the relative deprivation we encounter in the West to the absolute deprivation suffered by millions in other parts of the world.1 If we want to determine how the machine of public law works in generating precarity, we need first to understand how the machine is wired. That is no easy task. The machine was not built from one","PeriodicalId":39188,"journal":{"name":"Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies","volume":"27 1","pages":"35 - 57"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Public Law, Precarity, and Access to Justice\",\"authors\":\"Amnon Lev\",\"doi\":\"10.2979/indjglolegstu.27.1.0035\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Equality before the law is an axiom of public law, perhaps the most fundamental public law axiom of all. Our commitment to this equality is deepened by the knowledge that it does not map perfectly onto social reality. Because people are not equal in rank and privilege, precisely because they are not afforded the same opportunities, or rather the same opportunity to take advantage of opportunity, we must provide equal access to justice for those that lack a voice in society: the poor, the marginalized, the “deviants.” Seen in that perspective, access to justice is an unconditional good. In this paper I shall attempt to nuance that belief by showing that, in addition to making us equal before the law, public law systems generate precarity. Public law systems do so by distributing access to justice in ways that make certain groups in society easy prey for those more powerful than themselves. The most obvious implications of the argument concern the constitutional sphere. But its most momentous implications may show themselves beyond that sphere. As the idea of the rule of law spreads around the world, driven by governance reforms and by the efforts of human rights advocates, the mechanisms of inand exclusion that underpin the operation of public law spread with it, reproducing on a global scale the social dynamics that generate inequality within the polities that law orders. As we shall see, public law may be one of the links that tie the relative deprivation we encounter in the West to the absolute deprivation suffered by millions in other parts of the world.1 If we want to determine how the machine of public law works in generating precarity, we need first to understand how the machine is wired. That is no easy task. The machine was not built from one\",\"PeriodicalId\":39188,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies\",\"volume\":\"27 1\",\"pages\":\"35 - 57\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-06-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2979/indjglolegstu.27.1.0035\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2979/indjglolegstu.27.1.0035","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

法律面前人人平等是公法的一条公理,也许是最基本的公法公理。我们对这种平等的承诺因认识到它并没有完全反映社会现实而加深。因为人们在等级和特权上不平等,正是因为他们没有得到同样的机会,或者更确切地说,没有同样的机会利用机会,我们必须为那些在社会中缺乏发言权的人提供平等的诉诸司法的机会:穷人、边缘化者、“离经叛道者”。从这个角度来看,诉诸司法是一种无条件的好处。在这篇论文中,我将试图通过表明,除了使我们在法律面前平等之外,公法体系还会产生不确定性,来细致入微地表达这种信念。公法体系通过分配诉诸司法的机会来做到这一点,使社会中的某些群体容易成为比自己更有权势的人的猎物。这一论点最明显的含义涉及宪法领域。但其最重要的影响可能会超越这一领域。随着法治理念在治理改革和人权倡导者努力的推动下在世界各地传播,支撑公法运作的空洞和排斥机制也随之传播,在全球范围内再现了在法律所统治的政体内产生不平等的社会动态。正如我们将要看到的,公法可能是将我们在西方遇到的相对贫困与世界其他地区数百万人遭受的绝对贫困联系起来的纽带之一。1如果我们想确定公法机器是如何产生不稳定的,我们首先需要了解机器是如何连接的。这不是一项容易的任务。这台机器不是由一台机器制造的
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Public Law, Precarity, and Access to Justice
Equality before the law is an axiom of public law, perhaps the most fundamental public law axiom of all. Our commitment to this equality is deepened by the knowledge that it does not map perfectly onto social reality. Because people are not equal in rank and privilege, precisely because they are not afforded the same opportunities, or rather the same opportunity to take advantage of opportunity, we must provide equal access to justice for those that lack a voice in society: the poor, the marginalized, the “deviants.” Seen in that perspective, access to justice is an unconditional good. In this paper I shall attempt to nuance that belief by showing that, in addition to making us equal before the law, public law systems generate precarity. Public law systems do so by distributing access to justice in ways that make certain groups in society easy prey for those more powerful than themselves. The most obvious implications of the argument concern the constitutional sphere. But its most momentous implications may show themselves beyond that sphere. As the idea of the rule of law spreads around the world, driven by governance reforms and by the efforts of human rights advocates, the mechanisms of inand exclusion that underpin the operation of public law spread with it, reproducing on a global scale the social dynamics that generate inequality within the polities that law orders. As we shall see, public law may be one of the links that tie the relative deprivation we encounter in the West to the absolute deprivation suffered by millions in other parts of the world.1 If we want to determine how the machine of public law works in generating precarity, we need first to understand how the machine is wired. That is no easy task. The machine was not built from one
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Managing Digital Resale in the Era of International Exhaustion The Digital Transformation of Tax Systems Progress, Pitfalls, and Protection in a Danish Context Blockchain and the Right to Good Administration: Adding Blocks to or Blocking of the Globalization of Good Administration? The Risk of Digitalization: Transforming Government into a Digital Leviathan Guilty of Probable Cause: Public Arrest Records and Dignity in the Information Age
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1