1,720,966 research outputs found
სამართლებრივი დილემის კონცეფცია
Full text linkThis article is based on the monograph (Irresolvable Norm Conflicts in International Law: The Concept of A Legal Dilemma) of Valentin Jeutner pioneering the concept of legal dilemma in the doctrine of international law. Briefly, the concept of a legal dilemma is a theory of irresolvable norm conflicts. The concept of legal dilemma serves as a normative exposition of the international legal states of affairs where the conflict between two legal norms is so fundamental that their adequate resolution through norm conflict resolution techniques of contemporary international law is impossible. In this article, the author conceptualizes legal dilemmas as an unavoidable and irresolvable conflict between norms of international law. The intrinsic nature of legal dilemmas resembles a legal state of superposition where a given conduct is both illegal and legal at the same time. That is, if one norm is favored over the other, the other is necessarily unduly impaired. Upon providing the general legal account of the concept of legal dilemma, the author responds affirmatively to their presence in contemporary international law. Subsequently, the author ventures to demonstrate that various legal devices to accommodate legal dilemmas once they have arisen are unsatisfactory. Then he establishes that judicial institutions – for a multiplicity of different legal and non-legal reasons – do not represent an appropriate forum for dealing with the various substantial problems posed by legal dilemmas. Thus, the author proposes that judicial institutions – instead of deciding the legal dilemmas themselves – must issue dilemmatic declarations when confronted with an irresolvable and unavoidable norm conflict. Dilemmatic declarations communicate that a legal dilemma exists but do not resolve a dilemma in favor of one or the other norm. However, the author warns us that the issuance of dilemmatic declarations must occur only after the most rigorous and careful application of norm conflict resolution and accommodation techniques. Importantly, dilemmatic declarations do not themselves decide the legal dilemmas but delegate the decision-making competence to the archetypal subjects of international law and the authors of the legal dilemmas themselves – the States. In the author's view, the final say over the decision of the legal dilemmas falls precisely to the States due to the inherent epistemological and/or metaphysical difficulties associated with deciding the legal dilemmas. A State’s decision of a dilemma possesses no legal precedential value and after a State has decided the legal dilemma, the judicial institutions should then enforce an unduly impaired norm. Finally, the author posits the merits of dilemmatic legal thinking in the international legal thought, one of which is to enhance the conceptual understanding of international law, transcend the binary representations of norms only as legal and illegal and to enable States to engage with and reflect constructively about the problems the existence of legal dilemmas presuppose.ხშირად, ტერმინი „დილემა“ გამოიყენება ისეთი უამრავი განსხვავებული, ეშმაკური საერთაშორისოსამართლებრივი პრობლემის აღსაწერად, რომლის მხოლოდ ერთი კონცეფციის ფარგლებში მოხელთება ძალიან რთულია. თუმცა, ტერმინის ამ სადავო გამოყენებისაგან განსხვავებით, სამართლებრივი დილემის კონცეფცია, წინამდებარე ნაშრომში წარმოდგენილია როგორც ტექნიკურ-იურიდიული ტერმინი. კერძოდ, სამართლებრივი დილემის კონცეფცია, როგორც ეს გაგებული და წარმოჩენილია ამ ნაშრომში, ეხება საერთაშორისო სამართლის ნორმებს შორის წარმოქმნილ გარდაუვალ და გადაუჭრელ კონფლიქტს. ამ ნაშრომის პირველი მიზანია ნათელი მოჰფინოს და ახსნას ამ დეფინიციის უამრავი ელემენტი (1). მეორე მიზანი კი, – წარმოადგინოს და განიხილოს უამრავი სტრატეგია სამართლებრივი დილემების გადასაჭრელად მას შემდეგ, რაც ისინი თავს იჩნენენ (2). იქიდან გამომდინარე, რომ სამართლებრივი დილემის კონცეფცია ახალი განსაკუთრებული მნიშვნელობის მქონე კონცეფციაა, რომელიც მიზნად ისახავს მისთვის ახალი განსაზღვრების მინიჭებას მოცემულ კონტექსტში არსებული დისკუსიის მიზნებისთვის, ამ ნაშრომის საბოლოო მიზანია გაამართლოს კონცეფციის არსებობა და აღმოაჩინოს დილემატური სამართლებრივი აზროვნების ღირსებები (3)
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
The Possibility of a Legal Dilemma
No full textThe second part validates the stipulative definition of Part I by identifying those norm conflicts which contemporary international law cannot satisfactorily resolve. In doing so, this part answers the second research question—whether legal dilemmas could exist in international law—in the affirmative and demarcates the doctrinal space that legal dilemmas occupy. The argument develops in three sections. The first section identifies the inherent limitations of norm conflict resolution devices. Norm conflict resolution devices deal with a norm conflict by establishing a hierarchy or a compromise between norms. They thereby identify a course of action that avoids impairing either norm unduly. The second section considers the limitation of norm conflict accommodation devices. The third section explains why measures of last resort do not preclude the possibility of the existence of legal dilemmas.</p
Conclusion
No full textThe final part offers some concluding thoughts and attempts to distil the book’s core findings and arguments. The conclusions will be presented in two sections. The first section focuses on the implications of the concept of a legal dilemma on the international legal order itself. Specifically, it will be considered how the acknowledgement of the concept of a legal dilemma influences the operation and character of the contemporary international legal order. In the second section the focus shifts to a more general consideration of the implications of the concept of a legal dilemma on the legal discourse in principle and on law’s relationship with other normative orders.</p
The Decision of a Legal Dilemma
No full textThe third part addresses the third research question; namely by whom and how should a legal dilemma be decided? The first section focusses mainly on the introduction and description of the three elements of the book’s proposal: a dilemmatic declaration, a sovereign decision, and the acceptance of responsibility for any decision taken. The second and third section then defend the proposal against various objections. First, various theoretical objections relating to the law of non-contradiction, the ‘ought implies can’ maxim, and the monopoly of violence will be considered. Subsequently, the final section of this third part considers more practical concerns related to the jurisdiction of international courts, sovereign decisionism, and the potential unfairness of the proposed method for addressing dilemmatic circumstances.</p
The Definition of a Legal Dilemma
No full textThe first part answers the book’s first question: ‘What is a Legal Dilemma?’ It frames the book’s analysis by offering a stipulative definition of the term legal dilemma and its constitutive components as a term of art. Once defined, the term will then be distinguished from numerous related concepts (Section A), such as legal gaps, disagreements, or paradoxes. The first part also considers various circumstances, including international law’s non-hierarchical nature and fragmentation, which increase the potential frequency with which dilemmas may arise (Section B). Finally, this part introduces a distinction between dilemmas responding to epistemic undecidability and to metaphysical undecidability (Section C).</p
The Aesthetic Authority of Law: Experiments with Legal Form
No full textThe legal form dictates the contours of law’s appearance. Texts are neatly divided into (often) numbered paragraphs. Pages must conform to specified layouts. Conventions regulate the use of fonts, punctuation and colours. Legal terms of art replace colloquial expressions. Human experiences enter legal texts only in mediated, sanitized forms. The dictats of legal form are all but incidental. They condition law’s authority. By repeatedly modifying the Case of the S.S. Lotus (Permanent Court of International Justice 1927), this book invites readers to consider how modifications of law’s appearance alter law’s authority.
Valentin Jeutner is an Associate Professor of Law at Lund University, Sweden, and a Senior Retained Lecturer at Pembroke College, Oxford, UK.The legal form dictates the contours of law’s appearance. Texts are neatly divided into (often) numbered paragraphs. Pages must conform to specified layouts. Conventions regulate the use of fonts, punctuation and colours. Legal terms of art replace colloquial expressions. Human experiences enter legal texts only in mediated, sanitized forms. The dictats of legal form are all but incidental. They condition law’s authority. By repeatedly modifying the Case of the S.S. Lotus (Permanent Court of International Justice 1927), this book invites readers to consider how modifications of law’s appearance alter law’s authority.
Valentin Jeutner is an Associate Professor of Law at Lund University, Sweden, and a Senior Retained Lecturer at Pembroke College, Oxford, UK
Variations on the Author
Full text link“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
- …
