The legal sociology (or legal sociology ) is often described as a sub-discipline of sociology or an interdisciplinary approach in legal studies. Some see the sociology of law as "necessary" for the field of sociology while others tend to regard it as a field of research trapped between the discipline of law and sociology. Still others regard it not as a sub-discipline of sociology or as a branch of the study of law but as a field of research upon itself in the wider social science tradition. Thus, it can be described without reference to mainstream sociology as "a systematic, empirical, empirical, empirical study of law as a set of social practices or as an aspect or area of ​​social experience." It has been seen as treating law and justice as the fundamental institution of the basic structure of society mediating "between political and economic interests, between cultures and the normative order of society, establishing and maintaining interdependence, and representing themselves as the source of consensus, coercion and social control."
Regardless of whether legal sociology is defined as a sub-discipline of sociology, an approach in legal studies, or a field of research in itself, remains intellectually dependent primarily on traditions, methods and theories of mainstream sociology and, to a lesser extent in other social sciences such as anthropology social, political science, social policy, criminology and psychology; thus, it reflects social theory and uses social scientific methods to study law, legal institutions and legal behavior.
More specifically, legal sociology consists of various approaches to the study of law in society, which empirically examine and theorize interactions between law, law, non-legal institutions and social factors. Areas of socio-legal investigation include the social development of legal institutions, forms of social control, rule of law, interaction between legal culture, social construction of legal issues, legal profession, and the relationship between law and social change.
Sociology of law is also useful from and sometimes refers to research conducted in other fields such as comparative law, critical law studies, jurisprudence, legal theory, law and economics and law and literature. Its objectives include the historical movement of law and justice and their contemporaneous contemporary constructions, for example, in the field of jurisprudence focused on institutional questions conditioned by social and political situations, in interdisciplinary dominance such as criminology, and through analysis of economic efficiency and social impacts of norms -legals norm.
Video Sociology of law
Asal intelektual
The roots of sociology of law can be traced back to the work of sociologists and jurists from the turn of the previous century. The relationship between law and society is sociologically explored in the seminal works of Max Weber and ÃÆ' â € ° mile Durkheim. The writings of law by this classical sociologist are the basis for the whole of the sociology of law today. A number of other scholars, especially jurists, also use social scientific theories and methods in an attempt to develop the sociological theory of law. Especially among them are Leon Petrazycki, Eugen Ehrlich and Georges Gurvitch.
For Max Weber, the so-called "rational form of law" as a type of domination in society, can not be attributed to people but to abstract norms. He understands a coherent legal body and can be calculated in terms of rational-legal authority. Such coherent and calculating law forms the preconditions for modern political developments and the modern state of bureaucracy and develops in parallel with the growth of capitalism. The center for the development of modern law is the formal rationalization of the law on the basis of common procedures applied fairly and fairly for all. Modern rational law is also codified and impersonal in its application to certain cases. In general, Weber's point of view can be described as an external approach to the law that studies the characteristics of empirical law, as opposed to the internal perspective of legal science and the moral approach of legal philosophy.
Durkheim wrote in the Division of Work within the Community that as society becomes more complex, the civil legal entities that are primarily concerned with restitution and compensation grow at the expense of criminal law and criminal sanctions. Over time, the law has undergone a transformation from repressive law into restitutive law. Restitutive law operates in societies where there is high individual variation and an emphasis on personal rights and responsibilities. For Durkheim, law is an indicator of the mode of integration of a society, which can be mechanical, between identical, or organic parts, between differentiated parts as in industrial societies. Durkheim also argues that the sociology of law must be developed together, and in close connection with, moral sociology, studying the development of a value system that is reflected in the law.
In Fundamental Principles of Sociology of Law , Eugen Ehrlich developed a sociological approach to the study of law by focusing on how social networks and groups govern social life. He explores the relationship between common law and social norms and distinguishes between "positive law," composed of compulsive norms of state requiring official enforcement, and "living law," consisting of rules of conduct that are strictly adhered to and which dominate socially. life. The latter appears spontaneously as people interact with each other to form social associations.
The center of gravity from legal development henceforth from ancient times is no longer in the activities of the state, but in the society itself, and must be sought there at the present time ".
This is the target of criticism by advocates of legal positivism such as lawyer Hans Kelsen for the distinction between "laws created by the state and laws produced by the imperative of non-state social association organizations". According to Kelsen, Ehrlich has confused Sein ("is") and Sollen ("supposed"). However, some argue that Ehrlich distinguishes between positive (or state) law, which lawyers learn and apply, and other forms of 'law', what Ehrlich calls "the law of life", which governs everyday life, generally preventing conflict from reaching lawyers and courts.
Leon Petrazycki distinguished between the form of "official law," endorsed by the state, and "intuitive law," which consists of legal experience which, in turn, consists of complex psychical processes in the minds of individuals without reference to outside authorities. Petrazycki's work discusses sociological problems and his methods are empirical, since he argues that one can acquire knowledge of objects or relationships only by observation. However, he inserted his theory in the language of cognitive psychology and moral philosophy rather than sociology. As a result, his contribution to the development of the sociology of law is largely unrecognized. For example, Petrazycki's "intuitive law" affects not only the development of Georges Gurvitch's concept of "social law" (see below), which in turn has left marks on socio-legal theorization, but also later socio-legal scholarship. Among those directly inspired by Petrazycki's work are Polish legal sociologist Adam PodgÃÆ'³recki.
Theodor Geiger developed a close analysis of Marxist legal theory. He highlights how law becomes "a factor in social transformation in a democratic society of a kind governed by the consent declared by universal suffrage of the population which is done periodically". Geiger went on to develop the outstanding characteristics of his antimetaphysical thought, until he transcended it with practical nihilism. The nihilism of Geiger's values ​​paves the way for a form of legal nihilism, which promotes the development of a calm democracy "capable of increasing conflicts to the intellectual level and anesthetized feelings, conscious of its own inability to make any claims, values, ethics or policies about the nature of truth ".
Georges Gurvitch is interested in combining simultaneous legal manifestations in various forms and at various levels of social interaction. The goal is to design the concept of "social law" as a law of integration and cooperation. Gurvitch's social law is an integral part of the general sociology. "This is also one of the earliest sociological contributions to the theory of legal pluralism, because it challenges all legal conceptions based on a single source of legal, political, or moral authority".
As a discipline, legal sociology has an early acceptance in Argentina. As a local movement of legal scholars derived from the work of Carlos Cossio, South American researchers have focused on comparative law and sociological insights, constitutional law and society, human rights, and a psycho-social approach to legal practice.
Maps Sociology of law
The sociological approach to studying the law
Modern legal sociology
The sociology of law became clearly defined as the field of academic learning and empirical research after the Second World War. After World War II, legal studies did not become central in sociology, although some well-known sociologists wrote about the role of law in society. In Talcott Parsons's work, for example, law is understood as an essential mechanism of social control. In response to the criticism developed against functionalism, another sociological perspective on law emerged. Sociologists are critical, developing a legal perspective as an instrument of power. However, other theorists in legal sociology, such as Philip Selznick, argue that modern law becomes increasingly responsive to the needs of society and must be approached morally as well. Still other scholars, especially American sociologist Donald Black, developed a highly scientific legal theory on the basis of a pure sociology paradigm. Equally broad in orientation, but again different, is the autopoietic system theory of German sociologist Niklas Luhmann, presenting the law or "legal system" as one of the ten functional systems (see functional differentiation) of society.
All collective human life is directly or indirectly shaped by law. The law is like knowledge, an essential and comprehensive fact of social conditions.
Social philosopher JÃÆ'¼rgen Habermas disagrees with Luhmann and argues that the law can do a better job as an 'institution' system by representing more faithfully the interests of everyday people in the 'living world'. Yet another sociological theory of law and lawyers is that Pierre Bourdieu and his followers, who see law as a social field in which the actors strive for cultural, symbolic and economic capital and thereby develop professional reproduction of habitus from lawyers. In some continental European countries, empirical research in legal sociology has developed strongly since the 1960s and 1970s. In Poland, the work of Adam PodgÃÆ'³recki and his colleagues (often influenced by Petrazycki's ideas) is very important; in Sweden, empirical research in the sociology of law in this period was pioneered primarily by Per Stjernquist, and in Norway by Vilhelm Aubert.
In recent years, a wide variety of theories have emerged in the sociology of law as a result of the proliferation of theories in sociology broadly. Among recent influences can be mentioned the work of French philosopher Michel Foucault, the German social theorist JÃÆ'¼rgen Habermas, feminism, postmodernism and deconstruction, neo-Marxism, and behaviorism. The diversity of theoretical influences in the sociology of law also marks the broader field of law and society. Multidisciplinary and community law remains highly popular, while the discipline of legal discipline sociology is also "more organized than ever in institutional and professional terms".
Law and Society
Law and Society is an American movement, established after the Second World War through initiatives especially sociologists who have an interest in the study of law. The rationale of the movement of Law and Society is subtly summarized in two short sentences by Lawrence Friedman: "Law is a great vital existence in the United States, too important to be handed over to lawyers". Its founders believe that "legal studies and legal institutions in their social context can be shaped as scientific fields differentiated by their commitment to interdisciplinary dialogue and multidisciplinary research methods". The establishment of the Law and Society Association in 1964 and the Legal and Community Review in 1966 ensured continuity in the scientific activities of the Law and Society movement and enabled its members to influence legal education and policymaking. in America.
In one view, the main difference between the sociology of law and Law and Society is that the latter does not confine itself theoretically or methodologically to sociology and try to accommodate insights from all social disciplines. "Not only providing a home for sociologists and social anthropologists and political scientists with an interest in law, it also tries to include psychologists and economists who study the law." From another point of view, both the sociology of law and Law and Society must be seen as multidisciplinary or transdisciplinary companies although legal sociology has a special relationship with the methods, theories and sociological traditions.
During the 1970s and 1980s a number of original empirical studies were conducted by Law and Society scholars on conflict and dispute resolution. In his early work, William Felstiner, for example, focused on alternative ways of resolving conflicts (avoidance, mediation, litigation, etc.). Together with Richard Abel and Austin Sarat, Felstiner developed the idea of ​​a disputed pyramid and the formula "naming, blaming, claiming," which refers to the various stages of conflict resolution and pyramid levels.
Sociological jurisprudence
The sociology of law is often distinguished from sociological jurisprudence. The latter is not primarily concerned with the debate in mainstream sociology and is involved with some debates in jurisprudence and legal theory. Sociological jurisprudence seeks to base legal arguments on sociological insights and, unlike legal theory, deals with worldly practices that create institutions of law and social operations that reproduce the legal system over time. It was developed in the United States by Louis Brandeis and Roscoe Pound. It was influenced by the work of pioneering legal sociologists, such as Austrian law expert Eugen Ehrlich and Russian-French sociologist Georges Gurvitch.
Although distinguishing between the various branches of the study of social law allows us to explain and analyze the development of the sociology of law in relation to sociology and major legal studies, such potentially artificial differences are not always beneficial for the development of the field as a whole.. For social scientific legal studies to go beyond the theoretical and empirical limits, which currently define their scope, they must go beyond such artificial distinctions.
Socio-legal studies
'Socio-legal studies' in the UK have grown mainly due to the importance of law schools in promoting interdisciplinary legal studies. Either regarded as an emerging discipline, sub-disciplinary or methodological approach, often seen in light of its relationship with, and the role of opposition in, the law. It should not, therefore, be confused with the legal sociology of many Western European countries or the Law and Society scholarship in the US, which encourages stronger disciplinary links with the social sciences. In the past, it has been presented as an applied branch of the sociology of law and was criticized for being empirical and atheist. Max Travers, for example, considers socio-legal studies as a sub-field of social policy, "primarily concerned with influencing or serving government policy in the provision of legal services" and adding that it "has abandoned any aspirations to develop a theory of policy processes".
Leading practitioners of socio-legal studies include Professor Carol Smart, co-director of the Morgan Center for the Study of Relationships and Personal Life, (named sociologist, David Morgan), as well as Professors Mavis Maclean and John Eekelaar who together with the director of the Oxford Center for Family Law and Policy OXFLAP).
Socio-legal investigation method
Legal sociology has no method of inquiry that has been developed specifically for conducting socio-legal research. Instead, he uses various social scientific methods, including qualitative and quantitative research techniques, to explore legal and legal phenomena. Positivistic as well as interpretative (such as discourse analysis) and ethnographic approaches to data collection and analysis are used in the socio-legal field.
The legal sociology of England
The sociology of law is a small, but growing, sub-field of British sociology and legal scholarship at the time Campbell and Wiles wrote their review of legal and community research in 1976. Unfortunately, despite its initial promise, it remained a small field. Very few empirical sociological studies are published each year. Nevertheless, there are some excellent studies, representing various sociological traditions as well as some of the main theoretical contributions. The two most popular approaches during the 1960s and 1970s were interactionism and Marxism.
Symbolic interactionism and Marxism
Interactionism has become popular in America in the 1950s and 1960s as a radical political alternative to structural functionalism. Instead of seeing society as a system that regulates and controls individual actions, interactionists argue that sociology should address what people do in certain situations, and how they perceive their own actions. Sociology of deviance, which covers topics such as crime, homosexuality, and mental illness, is the focus of this theoretical debate. Functionalists have described crime as a problem to be managed by the legal system. Instead, labeling theorists focus on the process of law-making and enforcement: how crime is built as a problem. A number of British sociologists, and some researchers at law schools, have used these ideas in writing about law and crime.
The most influential sociological approach during this period was, however, Marxism - which claimed to offer a comprehensive and scientific understanding of society as a whole in the same way as structural-functionalism, though with an emphasis on struggle between different groups for material gain, rather than value -consensus. This approach captures the imagination of many people with left-wing political views in law schools, but also produces some interesting empirical studies. This includes the historical study of how certain laws are used to advance the interests of dominant economic groups, as well as the impressive ethnography of Pat Carlen, which combines the analytical sources of Marxism and interactionism, in particular the sociology of Erving Goffman, in writing about the judges' courts.
Oxford Center for Socio-Legal Studies
The 1980s was also a fertile time for the sociology of empirical law in England, largely because Donald Harris deliberately set out to create conditions for beneficial exchange between lawyers and sociologists at Oxford University's Center for Socio-Legal Studies. He was fortunate enough to recruit a number of young and talented social scientists, including J. Maxwell Atkinson and Robert Dingwall who were interested in etnometodology, conversational analysis, and sociology of the profession, and Doreen McBarnet who became a heretical figure left after publishing his doctoral thesis, which advanced Marxist analysis the very clear and strong of the criminal justice system. Ethnometodologi has never been mentioned in this review, and tends to be ignored by many reviewers in this field because it is not easily assimilated to its theoretical interests. However, one may note that it always offers a more radical and thorough way of theoretical action than interactionism (though the two approaches have many similarities when compared to traditions that view society as a structural whole, such as Marxism or structuralism-functionalism). During his time at the center, J. Maxwell Atkinson collaborated with Paul Drew, a sociologist at the University of York, in what became the first conversational analytic study of courtroom interactions, using a transcript of a coronary hearing in Northern Ireland.
Another area of ​​interest developed at Oxford during this period was the sociology of the profession. Robert Dingwall and Philip Lewis edit what remains an interesting and theoretically diverse collection, bringing together specialists from the sociology of law and medicine. The most famous study to date has been published by American scientist Richard Abel who used the ideas and concepts of functionalist, Marxist, and Weberian sociology to describe the income and high status enjoyed by British lawyers for much of the 20th century.
Recent developments
Since the 1980s, relatively few empirical studies of law and legal institutions have been conducted by British sociologists, ie empirical studies and at the same time involved with theoretical problems of sociology. However there are some exceptions. To begin with, legal sociology, along with so many areas of academic work, has been enlivened and renewed through involvement with feminism. There is much interest in the implications of Foucault's ideas on governing to understand law, as well as in continental thinkers such as Niklas Luhmann and Pierre Bourdieu. Again, one can argue that a somewhat less empirical study has been produced than expected, but many interesting works have been published.
The second exception can be found in the works of researchers who have used the resources of ethnomethodology and symbolic interactionism in studying the rule of law. This type of research is clearly sociological rather than socio-legal research because it is constantly involved in debates with other theoretical traditions in sociology. Max Travers's doctoral thesis on the work of criminal law firms takes on other sociologists, and especially Marxists, for the task of not dealing with or respecting how lawyers and clients understand their own actions (the standard argument used by ethnomethodologists in debates with structural traditions in the discipline). It also, however, explores the issues raised by legal thinkers in their critique of the structural tradition in the sociology of law: the extent to which social science can address the content of legal practice.
Despite relatively limited developments in recent empirical research, theoretical debates in the sociology of law have become important in the English literature over the last few decades, with contributions from David Nelken exploring the sociological problems of comparative law and potential legal cultural ideas, Roger Cotterrell developed a new view of the relationship of law and society to replace what he saw as an outdated paradigm of 'law and society', and other scholars, such as David Schiff and Richard Nobles, examined the potential theories of the Luhmannian system and to what extent the law could be seen as an autonomous social field rather than being closely linked to other social aspects. It has also significantly become a growing field of socio-legal research in the field of regulation and governance, which British scholars have been a major contributor.
Designing the sociological concept of law
In contrast to the traditional understanding of law (see separate entries on the law), legal sociology usually does not see and define the law only as a system of rules, doctrines and decisions, which exist independently of the society beyond it. has appeared. Legal aspects of the rule, recognized, important, but provide an inadequate basis for describing, analyzing and understanding the law in the context of society. Thus, legal sociology regards law as a set of institutional practices that have developed over time and developed in relation to, and through interaction with, cultural, economic and socio-political structures and institutions. As a modern social system, the law seeks to obtain and retain autonomy to function independently of other social institutions and systems such as religion, politics and economics. However, it remains historically and functionally related to these other institutions. Thus, one of the goals of the legal sociology remains to devise an empirical methodology capable of describing and explaining the interdependence of modern law with other social institutions.
Some influential approaches in the sociology of law have challenged legal definitions in official (state) law (see eg Eugen Ehrlich's concept of Georges Gurvitch's "law of life" and "social law"). From this perspective, the law is widely understood to include not only legal systems and formal or (formal) legal processes and processes, but also various informal (or unofficial) nominations and regulations generated in groups, associations and societies. The sociological studies of the law, therefore, are not limited to analyzing how the rules or institutions of the legal system interact with social classes, sex, race, religion, sexuality and other social categories. They also focus on how the internal normative sequences of different groups and "communities", such as community lawyers, businessmen, scientists, members of political parties, or Mafia members, interact with each other. In short, the law is studied as an integral and constitutive part of social institutions, groups and communities. This approach is further developed under the section on legal pluralism.
Non-Western legal sociology
Interest in legal sociology continues to be wider in Western countries. Several important studies have been produced by Indian scholars, but we have only found a limited number of socio-legal jobs by researchers from, for example, the Middle East or central and northern parts of Africa. Thus, the spread of sociological studies of global law appears uneven and concentrated, above all, in industrialized countries with a democratic political system. In this sense, the global expansion of the sociology of law "does not occur uniformly across national boundaries and appears to correlate with a combination of factors such as national wealth and poverty and the shape of political organization, as well as historical factors such as the growth of the welfare state... However, none of these factors can explain this difference ".
Contemporary perspective
Legal pluralism
Legal pluralism is a concept developed by the sociologist of law and social anthropologist "to describe the various layers of the law, usually with different sources of legitimacy, existing in one country or society". It is also defined "as a situation in which two or more legal systems coexist in the same social field". The legal pluralists define law extensively to include not only the judicial system and judges supported by the coercive power of the state, but also the "non-legal form of normative arrangement". Legal pluralism comprises many different methodological approaches and as a concept, it embraces "diverse and often contradictory perspectives of law, from the recognition of the various laws of the nation-state, to the broader and more open concept of the law, which is not necessarily independent on state recognition of validity.The final legal concept can arise whenever two or more legal systems exist in the same social field ".
The ideology of legal positivism has had a strong control on the imaginations of lawyers and social scientists that his image of the world of law has succeeded in disguising itself as fact and has shaped the foundations of social theory and law.
Legal pluralism has occupied a central position in socio-legal theorization since the beginning of the sociology of law. The sociological theory of Eugen Ehrlich and Georges Gurvitch is an early sociological contribution to legal pluralism. Moreover, it has provided the most enduring topic of socio-legal debate for decades in both legal sociology and legal anthropology. and has received more than part criticism from advocates of various flows of legal positivism. Critics often ask: "How is law differentiated in the pluralist view from other normative systems? What makes the social rule system legal?".
The controversy arose chiefly "from the claim that the only true law is a law created and enforced by the modern state". This point of view is also known as "legal centralism". From the standpoint of the central law, John Griffiths writes, "the law and should be a state law, uniform for all, exclusive of all other laws, and administered by a single set of state institutions." Thus, according to legal centralism, "customary law and religious law not properly called 'law' except as far as the state has chosen to adopt and treat such normative arrangements as part of its own law ".
Differences are often made between the "weak" and "strong" versions of legal pluralism. The "weak" version does not necessarily question the central assumption of "legal centralism", but merely recognizes that in the domain of Western state law other legal systems, such as adat or Islamic law, may also have autonomous (co-) existence. Thus, the "weak" version does not consider other forms of normative regulation as law. Like Tamanaha, one of the critics of legal pluralism, say: "The normative order is, well, the normative order, the Law is something else, something we isolate and call the law...". The "strong" version, on the other hand, rejects all models of centralized law and legal formalism, as "myth, ideal, claim, illusion," of state law as one of many forms of law or forms of social ordering. He insisted that modern law is plural, that it is both private and public, but most importantly "national legal systems (public officials) are often secondary to the main locus of regulation."
Criticisms directed at legal pluralism often use the basic assumption of legal positivism to question the validity of legal pluralism theories aim at criticizing this highly (positivistic) assumption. As Roger Cotterrell explains, pluralist conceptions should be understood as part of "the law sociologist's attempt to broaden the perspective of law.Specification of the law of a sociologist of law may be different from that suggested by lawyers in practice but will relate (indeed, in some ways merge) to the latter because should (if it is to reflect legal experience) consider the lawyers' perspective of law.So the pluralist approach in legal theory tends to recognize what lawyers usually recognize as law, but may see this law as a species of a larger genus, or treat conception lawyers about the law as reflecting a particular perspective determined by a particular purpose ".
Autopoiesis
Humberto Maturana and Francisco Varela originally invented the concept of autopoiesis in biological theory to describe the self-reproduction of living cells through self-reference. This concept was then borrowed, reconstructed in sociological terms, and introduced into the sociology of law by Niklas Luhmann. Luhmann's system theory goes beyond the classical understanding of the object/subject with regard to communication (and not 'action') as the basic element of any social system. He breaks with traditional Talcott Parsons system theory and descriptions based on the cybernetic feedback loop and structural understanding of the self-organization of the 1960s. This allows him to work on designing solutions for humanized subjects.
"Perhaps the most challenging idea incorporated in the theory of autopoiesis is that social systems should not be defined in terms of human agency or norms, but communications.Incommunication in turn is the unity of speech, information and understanding and is a social system recursively reproducing communication, sociological thesis This radical, which raises the fear of the inhuman legal theory and society, attempts to highlight the fact that the social system is constituted by communicative. "
According to Roger Cotterrell, "Luhmann... treats theory as the basis for all the sociological analysis of the general social system and its reciprocal relationship.But his theoretical claim of legal autonomy is a very strong postulate, presented before (and even, perhaps, in the place of) a kind of empirical study of detailed social and legal changes that comparative legal and sociologists are most likely to support. Postulatory theories of autopoiesis are not so much a guide of empirical research as explaining exactly how to interpret whatever research this can find. "
Legal culture
The legal culture is one of the central concepts of the sociology of law. The study of legal culture can, at the same time, be regarded as one of the common approaches in the sociology of law.
As a concept, it refers to "relatively stable legal oriented patterns of behavior and social attitudes," and thus is considered a subcategory of cultural concepts. This is a relatively new concept which, according to David Nelken, can be traced to "terms like the legal tradition or style of law, which have a much longer history in comparative law or in early political science.This presupposes and invites us to explore the existence systematic variations in patterns in 'law in the book' and 'law in action', and, above all, in relationships between them ".
As an approach, it focuses on aspects of legal culture, legal behavior and legal institutions and, thus, has an affinity with cultural anthropology, legal pluralism, and comparative law.
Lawrence M. Friedman is one of the socio-legal scholars who introduced the idea of ​​legal culture into the sociology of law. For Friedman, the legal culture "refers to public knowledge and attitudes and patterns of behavior to the legal system". It may also consist of "customary bodies organically linked to the culture as a whole." Friedman emphasizes the legal culture of the law and shows that one can explore legal culture at different levels of abstraction, for example at the level of the legal system, state, state or community Friedman is also known for introducing the distinction between "internal" and "external" legal culture. Slightly simplified, the former refers to the general attitudes and legal perceptions among legal system functionaries, such as the judiciary, while the latter may refer to citizens' attitudes to the legal system or general law and order.
Feminism
Law is always regarded as one of the most important places of engagement for feminism. As demonstrated by Ruth Fletcher's feminist involvement with the law has taken many forms over the years, which also shows their successful incorporation of theory and practice: "Through litigation, campaigns for reform and legal education, feminists have been explicitly involved with the law and law In taking the provision of specialist advice services, women's groups have played a role in making legislation accessible to those in need.By subduing legal concepts and methods for critical analysis, feminists have questioned the terms of the legal debate. "
Globalization
Globalization is often defined in terms of economic processes that bring about the development of radical culture at the world community level. Although legislation is an essential element of the process of globalization - and important studies of law and globalization have been done in the 1990s by, for example, Yves Dezalay and Bryant Garth and Volkmar Gessner - the importance of law to create and sustain the process of globalization is often overlooked in sociology globalization and remain, arguably, somewhat retarded in the sociology of law.
As Halliday and Osinsky point out, "Economic globalization is incomprehensible in spite of global business regulation and the development of an increasingly dependent market law." Cultural globalization can not be explained without attention to intellectual property rights institutionalized in law and the global governance regime. vulnerable populations can not be understood without tracing the impact of international criminal law and humanitarian law or international tribunals.The global contradiction of democratic institutions and the development of the state can not be meaningless unless considered in relation to constitutionalism.
Source of the article : Wikipedia
0 Comments