Problems of the Uncertainty of Law through the Prism of the Metamodern.
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu25.2022.406Abstract
The aim of the study is to form the fundamental problems of interpretation of legal texts on the basis of modern philosophical approaches, as well as the search for possible ways to overcome them. The focus of the article is the legal interpretation in international law, due to a number of special characteristics, like the extreme diversity of cultural and legal traditions, the relative primitiveness of international relations, etc. The author does not seek to draw prescriptive conclusions, but to describe descriptively the workings of the language of law, its understanding and use. The problem of the perception of texts is not new for science, but the relevance of this work is related to the analysis of the postmodernist critique of the interpretation of law. The main part of this critique focuses on two fundamental problems: semantic indeterminacy, when subjects put different meanings into the words they use, and also structural indeterminacy, demonstrated by M. Koskenniemi, when the arguments of the parties are seen as equivalent, making it impossible to make a truly reasoned choice between the arguments presented by the parties. Overcoming postmodernist criticism is possible on the basis of the concept of metamodern, which implies overcoming the main ideas and concepts of the modern and postmodern era. General scientific methods are used, in particular, deduction — to apply the concept of metamodern to individual problems of interpretation, as well as induction — to form general conclusions based on the analysis of the practice of interpretation of legal texts. The removal of the postmodern thesis of semantic indeterminacy of texts is based on the appeal to the ideas of modernity about the establishment of rules of interpretation and acceptance of certain limits of reasonable interpretation. Overcoming the identified structural ambiguity in the application of legal norms lies in rethinking the universal hierarchical organized system of values of modernity. In the modern world, a system with quasi-hierarchical values operates, where, in the absence of an explicitly constructed universal hierarchy, states view some values as higher in priority than others, making it possible for courts to choose between value-based arguments.
Keywords:
international law, interpretation, legal uncertainty, metamodern, semantic uncertainty, structural uncertainty
Downloads
References
Adorno, Teodor. 2003. Negative Dialectics. Moscow, Nauchnyi mir Publ. (In Russian)
Afanasov, Nikolay B. 2020. Metamodernism, Postironia and Capitalism in the anime One-Punch Man (end). Znanie. Ponimanie. Umenie 2: 200–208. (In Russian)
Agha, Petr. 2019. Human Rights Between Law and Politics: The Margin of Appreciation in Post-National Contexts. Hart Publishing.
Allen, Lori. 2013. The rise and fall of human rights. Cynicism and Politics in Occupied Palestine. Stanford University Press.
Bavli, Hillel J. 2005. Applying the Laws of Logic to the Logic of Law. Fordham Urb. Law Journal 33: 937–951.
Bianchi, Andrea., Peat, Danieal and Windsor, Matthew. (ed.). 2015. Interpretation in international law. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Chestnov, Ilya L. 2019. Legal reality as itemof postclassic law philosophies. Rossiiskii zhurnal pravovykh issledovanii 6(2): 28–34. (In Russian)
Crawford, James and Koskenniemi, Marti (ed.). 2012. The Cambridge companion to international law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Crawford, James. 2014. Chance, order, change: the course of international law, general course on public international law. Brill.
D’Amato, Antony. 1983. Legal Uncertainty. California Law Review 1 (71): 1–55.
Dupuy, Pierre-Marrie. 2005. Some reflections on contemporary international law and the appeal to universal values: A response to Martti Koskenniemi. European Journal of International Law 16 (1): 131–137.
ECHR. R. R. v. Poland. Application no. 27617/04. Judgment of 26 May 2011. § 186. Available at: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/fre?i=001–104911 (accessed: 02.05.2022).
Gadzhiev, Gadis A. 2018. Law and economics (methodology): textbook for masters. Moscow, INFRA-M Publ. (In Russian)
Galindo, George R. B. 2005. Martti Koskenniemi and the historiographical turn in international law. European Journal of International Law 16(3): 539–559.
Grigg-Spall, Ian and Ireland, Paddy. 1992. The critical lawyers’ handbook. Pluto Press.
Hart Georg L. 2007. The concept of law. St. Petersburg, St. Petersburg University Press. (In Russian)
Hessini, Leila. 2007. Abortion and Islam: policies and practice in the Middle East and North Africa. Reproductive health matters 15 (29): 78–84.
Human Rights Committee. General comment No. 36, CCPR/C/GC/36, 3 September 2019. Available at: https://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/15/treatybodyexternal/Download.aspx?symbolno=CCPR%2fC%2fGC%2f36&Lang=ru (accessed: 02.05.2022).
Hutton, Chris. 2009. Language, meaning and the law. Edinburgh, Edinburgh University Press.
Ignatieff, Michael. 2019. Human rights as politics and as idolatry. Мoscow, Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie Publ. (In Russian)
K. L. v. Peru, CCPR/C/85/D/1153/2003, Communication No. 1153/2003. Available at: https://juris.ohchr.org/Search/Details/1215 (accessed: 02.05.2022).
Koskenniemi, Marti. (ed.). 2000. Sources of international law. Routledge.
Koskenniemi, Marti. 2004. The gentle civilizer of nations: the rise and fall of international law 1870–1960. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Koskenniemi, Marti. 2006. From Apology to Utopia: The Structure of International Legal Argument. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Kozlova, Maria S. (ed.) 1996. Philosophical Ideas of Ludwig Wittgenstein. Moscow, IFRAN Publ. (In Russian)
Land, Molly. 2013. Reflections on the New Haven school. NYL Sch. L. Rev. 58: 919–930.
Lipkina, Nadejda N. 2008. Legal bases of application of the concept “Margin of appreciation” in practice of the European Court of Human Rights. Zhurnal rossiiskogo prava 9(141): 106–117. (In Russian)
Liverovsky, Aleksey A., Ovchinnikov, Aleksei I. (eds). 2021. Constitution. Constitutionalism. Constitutional Court. Moscow, Prospekt Publ. (In Russian)
Lyotard, Jean-Francois. 2016. The State of the Postmodern. St. Petersburg, Alateiia Publ. (In Russian)
Madigan, Janet. 2007. Truth, politics, and universal human rights. Palgrave Macmillan.
Marmor, Andrei. 1990. No Easy Cases? Canadian Journal of Law & Jurisprudence 2(3): 61–79.
Marmor, Andrei. 2005. Interpretation and legal theory. 2nd ed. Hart Publishing.
Martens, Fedor F. 2008. Modern international law of civilized nations. In 2 vols. Vol. 1. Moscow, Zertsalo Publ. (In Russian)
Masson-Delmotte, Valerie, Zhai, Panmao, and Piarmi, Anna and others (eds.) 2021. Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, 2021.
Morra, Lucia. 2010. New models for language understanding and the cognitive approach to legal metaphors. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law-Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique 23(4): 387–405.
Nefedov, Boris I. 2018. Catechism of graduate student of international law department: textbook. Moscow, MGIMO-University Publ. (In Russian)
Nolte, Georg. 2019. Treaties and their practice: symptoms of their rise or decline. Treaties and their Practice. Brill Nijhoff.
Ogleznev, Vitaly V. 2020. Indeterminacy of law as a linguistic problem in the context of Wittgenstein’s later philosophy. Praksema. Problemy vizual’noi semiotiki 4:137–149. (In Russian)
Paton v. United Kingdom, European Commission of Human Rights, 13 May 1980 (1981) 3 E. H. R. R. 408 Application No. 8416/78. Available at: https://www.globalhealthrights.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/EComHR-1980-Paton-v.-United-Kingdom-X.-v.-United-Kingdom.pdf (accessed:
05.2022).
Poliakov, Andrey V. 2006. Postclassical jurisprudence and the idea of communication. Pravovedenie 2: 28–29. (In Russian)
Poliakov, Andrey V. 2013. The rule of law, globalization and the problems of modernization of philosophy and theory of law. Pravovedenie 4 (309): 18–30. (In Russian)
Poliakov, Andrey V. 2016. General Theory of Law: Problems of Interpretation in the Context of the Communicative Approach: textbook. 2nd ed., rev. and suppl. Moscow, Prospekt Publ. (In Russian)
Polyakov, Andrey V. 2016. General theory of law: problems of interpretation in the context of the communicative approach: textbook. 2nd ed., rev. and suppl. Moscow, Prospect Publ. (In Russian)
Posner, Eric A. De Figueiredo, Migael F. P. 2005. Is the international court of justice biased? The Journal of Legal Studies 34(2): 599–630.
Radchenko, Simon. 2019. Bleeding Edge of Postmodernism: Metamodern Writing in the Novel by Thomas Pynchon. Interlitteraria 24(2): 495–508.
Shcherov, Vladimir I. 2021. Philosophical aspects of metamodernism. Journal of Gender and Interdisciplinarity 2(1): 567–588.
Stoeva, Yana. 2016. The ‘Uncertainty Hypothesis’ in International Economic Law. The Chinese Journal of Global Governance 2(1): 44–62.
Storm, Jason A. J. 2021. Metamodernism: The Future of Theory. Chicago, University of Chicago Press.
The European Commission of Human Rights. Case of Fretté v. France, Application no. 36515/97,Judgment of 26 February 2002. Available at: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/fre?i=001-60168 (accessed: 02.05.2022).
The European Commission of Human Rights. R. H. against Norway. As to the admissibility of Application No. 17004/90. Available at: https://www.globalhealthrights.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/H.-v.-NORWAY.pdf (accessed: 02.05.2022).
The Inglehart-Welzel World Cultural Map — World Values Survey 7. (2022). Available at: http://www.worldvaluessurvey.org/ (accessed: 02.05.2022).
Van den Akker, Robin. 2020. Metamodernism: Historicity, Affect, and Depth after Postmodernism. Moscow, RIPOL Klassik Publ. (In Russian)
Vissenberg, Al’mira and Shestakova, Ksenia. 2020. The Evolution of the Discourse on the Fragmentation of International Law. Mezhdunarodnoe Pravo 1: 29–49. (In Russian)
Von Bernstorff, Jochen. 2006. Sisyphus was an international lawyer. On Martti Koskenniemi’s “From Apology to Utopia” and the place of law in international politics. German Law Journal 7 (12): 1015–1035.
Wiessner, Siegfried. 2010. The New Haven School of Jurisprudence: a universal toolkit for understanding and shaping the law. Asia Pacific Law Review 18 (1): 45–61.
Wittgenstein, Ludvig. 2018. Philosophical Studies. Moscow, AST Publ. (In Russian)
Ziborov, Oleg, Medushevskaya, Natalja, Sigalov, Konstantin. 2021. “The Sociocultural Context in Law: Modernism — Postmodernism — Metamodernism”. WISDOM 1 (1): 232–245. https://doi.org/10.24234/wisdom.v1i1.682
Zor’kin, Valeriy. D. 2019. The right of metamodernity: Statement of the problem. Vystuplenie na IX Peterburgskom mezhdunarodnom iuridicheskom forume. Available at: https://rg.ru/2019/05/16/zorkin-priverzhennost-vernoj-filosofii-prava-pozvoliaet-tvorit-dobro.html (accessed: 02.05.2022). (In Russian)
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Articles of "Pravovedenie" are open access distributed under the terms of the License Agreement with Saint Petersburg State University, which permits to the authors unrestricted distribution and self-archiving free of charge.
