»Unlabelled » Law & Humanities Blog

Law & Humanities Blog

Law & Humanities Blog

Law, Cultural Anthropology, and Rehabilitation

Posted: 07 Dec 2011 01:53 PM PST


José Calvo González, University of Malaga School of Law, has published Odia el delito, y compadece al delincuente». Memoria de Correccionalismo, Antropología cultural y Literatura popular [Hate crime, and pity the criminal». Memory of Correctionalism, Cultural anthropology and Popular literature] in the online journal  ISLL Papers. Here is the abstract.

The work covers the circumstances of misleading ascription to the writer Concepción Arenal (1820-1893) as creator the slogan "Hate crime, and pity the criminal". Place the place and date on which this author is mentioned and its context and scope. Determines the direction of the reference according theory of correctionalism to a new horizon; that of social reintegration based on the principle of fraternity. Also use of cultural anthropology and popular literature to show the excesses and deficits of interpretation of the idea of fraternity among the pious institutions (Compagnia del Santissimo Crocifisso in Italy, XVI-XIX centuries) and mendicant groups (Hermandad de Ciegos de Madrid in Spain, XVI-XIX centuries) related to offenders sentenced to death. Finally, the Author suggests that the motto "Hate crime, and pity the criminal" back in the news as a marker of our convictions in the field of public morality and the idea of Human Dignity.
 
Download the article at the link.

Chinese Legal Philosophy

Posted: 07 Dec 2011 01:46 PM PST

Alex Chu Kwong Chan and Angus Young, Department of Accountancy, Hang Seng Management College; School of International Law, Southwest University of Political Science and Law, Centre for International Corporate Governance Research, Victoria University, have published Reinterpreting the Chinese Legal Doctrine of Li: Beyond Rites, Ritual and Ceremonies. Here is the abstract.



For thousands of years Chinese scholars had characterized China's system of regulation as li yi zhi bang. This literally means that China is governed by the doctrine of li. However, there a general misconception that the doctrine of li was conceived by Confucius, in fact it predates his birth. This paper aims to re-examine this doctrine with the aid of Chinese classics from 1100 B.C., in conjunction with Confucius's works to explain the meaning and workings of this regulatory concept. Li is multifaceted, versatile, and dynamic doctrine because it more than mere rituals, rites, and ceremonies. It is a form of non-legal and non-rule based regulatory doctrine that centre upon virtue, actualized and practiced through unwritten codes of conduct and behavior. This regulatory doctrine is also varies according to the social hierarchy between individuals, the context of the application, and the heritage of a particular li. The ultimate goal of li to create a civil society, where everyone is in tune with the cosmic order that li is a sub set. Thus, this pre-modern regulatory doctrine has elements of natural law.
Yet, the plurality of this regulatory doctrine appears to be similar to postmodernist views about law and regulation.Download the text of the paper from SSRN at the link.

Cross-Currents: Reassessing a Relationship Between French and Louisiana Law

Posted: 07 Dec 2011 01:39 PM PST

Benjamin West Janke, Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, and François-Xavier Licari, University of Metz Faculty of Law have published Des rives de la Seine à celles du Mississipi: le fabuleux destin de la maxime contra non valentem agere non currit praescriptio (From the Banks of the Seine to Those of Mississipi: The Fabulous Destiny of the Maxim Contra Non Valentem Agere Non Currit Praescriptio) at 63 Revue Internationale de Droit Comparé, Vol. 63, 809 (2011).


The relationship between Louisiana and France is not limited to written law. It also exists in one important extra-codal principle of prescription law: "contra non valentem agere non currit praescriptio". In this regard, the juridical parenthood is tight. We will show that "contra non valentem" in Louisiana is the fruit of French doctrine and jurisprudence. Furthermore, we will bring to light the noticeable similarity of the maxim's fate in France and Louisiana. Courts in both jurisdictions proclaimed it as dead, but despite the antagonism it faced, contra non valentem evolved as a major component of prescription's institution. Finally, we will dispel a deep-rooted myth that contra non valentem does not apply to the domain of acquisitive prescription and reveal another strong convergence between Louisiana and France.



La relation entre la France et la Louisiane ne se limite pas au droit légiféré. Elle se manifeste aussi en ce qui concerne un important principe non écrit du droit de la prescription: "contra non valentem agere non currit praescriptio". En ce domaine, la parenté juridique est étroite. En Louisiane, "contra non valentem" est le fruit de la doctrine et de la jurisprudence françaises. Nous mettrons aussi en lumière la similarité notable entre le destin de la maxime en France et en Louisiane. Dans ces deux pays, les tribunaux l'ont déclarée morte, mais malgré l'hostilité à laquelle elle a été confrontée, elle est devenue une pièce majeure de l'institution de la prescription. En dernier lieu, nous briserons le mythe bien enraciné selon lequel contra non valentem ne s'applique pas en droit louisianais de la prescription acquisitive, révélant ainsi une autre convergence de taille entre la France et la Louisiane.

Download the article from SSRN at the link.

They Shouldn't Have Gone On; They Went On

Posted: 07 Dec 2011 09:53 AM PST

James C. Oldham, Georgetown University Law Center, is publishing Only Eleven Shillings: Abusing Public Justice in England in the Late Eighteenth Century in the volume for 2012 of The Green Bag. Here is the abstract.

This eleven-shilling tempest started in 1786 in a local Court of Requests in Yarmouth, then generated, sequentially, a perjury indictment, three jury trials at the assizes (all before special juries), a jury verdict for £3,000 with costs of £800, an indictment for libeling the public justice of England, and a fourth jury trial (also before a special jury). Among the questions that the proceedings invite are: Why did the parties risk being bankrupted by this seemingly trivial dispute? How open to challenge were jury verdicts? When could a jury verdict be overturned because the damages assessed by the jury were considered by the reviewing court to be excessive? Could a jury verdict be thrown out based on a post-trial affidavit of one or more of the jurors claiming that the verdict had been reached by an improper method? How impressionable were the jurors, even special jurors, in response to the eloquence and forensic skills of the barristers? Who ultimately paid for the preparation and conduct of this pile of proceedings?
Download the article from SSRN at the link.
 
Bookmark and Share