Везде
Legal Pluralism As an Ideology and a Reality
Table of contents
Annotation Estimate Publication content
References Comments
Share
QR
Metrics
Legal Pluralism As an Ideology and a Reality
Annotation
PII
S1605-65900000622-5-1
DOI
10.61205/S160565900029629-5
Publication type
Article
Status
Published
Authors
Sergey Biryukov 
Occupation: Cand. Sci. (Law), Assoc. Prof., Associate Professor, Department of Theory and History of State and Law, OmSU
Affiliation: Dostoevsky Omsk State University, Omsk, Russia
Edition
Volume 28 Issue 8
Pages
25-41
Abstract

The concepts of legal pluralism used in jurisprudence, anthropology, and sociology are characterized by internal inconsistency and in their radical version are reasonably criticized by many scientists who solve the dilemma of monism and pluralism in favor of the former. At the same time, they are not simple populism, have a long history and are fully correlated with various facts of socio-legal reality such as the existence of international law, informal (direct-social) law in certain social groups, the complex structure of state law, the variability of law-making, law enforcement, non-governmental implementation of law, etc. This prompts us to reconsider the prevailing ideas about the content and meaning of legal pluralism, to demonstrate the possibilities of creating a consistent theory of it. The work uses various methods of scientific research, in particular, a dialectical approach to society (state) and law, a sociological approach in which legal pluralism is considered in an inextricable relationship with social pluralism. It is shown that legal pluralism is, first of all, a type of legal understanding reflecting the idea of the need to reflect in law the conflicting interests (values, ideas) of various personalities, social groups and society, as well as one of the ways to solve social contradictions enshrined in law. It is proved that legal pluralism can manifest itself both as a plurality of systems (subsystems) of law in society, and as an internal pluralism inherent in a particular system (subsystem) of law. The facts of genuine pluralism and quasi-pluralism are distinguished. The general significance of the theory of legal pluralism is seen in the confirmation of the connection of law with the ideas of freedom, justice, competition, in the possibility of consolidating in law extremely diverse models of balancing the interests of various subjects, in substantiating the fact that legal pluralism plays a positive role when it adequately reflects social pluralism as a condition for the preservation and development of society.

Keywords
legal pluralism, social pluralism, pluralism of law, pluralism in law, legal system, interest, interests in law
Date of publication
22.08.2024
Number of purchasers
0
Views
15
Readers community rating
0.0 (0 votes)
Cite Download pdf 100 RUB / 1.0 SU

To download PDF you should pay the subscribtion

Full text is available to subscribers only
Subscribe right now
Only article and additional services
Subscription benefits
100 RUB / 1.0 SU
Whole issue and additional services
Subscription benefits
1700 RUB / 0.0 SU
All issues and additional services for 2024
Subscription benefits
800 RUB / 80.0 SU

References



Additional sources and materials

1. Kudryavtsev V. N., Razumovich N. N. (eds). Chistoe uchenie o prave Gansa Kel'zena. Iss. 
2. Moscow, 1988. 2. Baytin M. I. Sushchnost' prava (Sovremennoe normativnoe pravoponimanie na grani dvukh vekov). Saratov, 2001. 
3. Shafirov V. M. Estestvenno-pozitivnoe pravo: vvedenie v teoriyu. Krasnoyarsk, 2004. 
4. Mukhametzaripov I. A. Shariat v pravovoy sisteme sovremennogo svetskogo gosudarstva: ideologiya ili neobkhodimost'? Musul'manskiy mir, 2015, no. 3. 
5. Romano S. L'ordinamento guiridico. Firenze, 1967. 
6. Romano S. The Legal Order. Abingdon; New York, 2017. 
7. Gurvich G. D. Filosofiya i sotsiologiya prava: izbrannye sochineniya. St. Petersburg, 2004. 
8. Berman P. S. Global Legal Pluralism: A Jurisprudence of Law Beyond Borders. Cambridge; New York, 2012. 
9. Griffiths J. What is Legal Pluralism? Journal of Legal Pluralism, 1986, no. 24. 
10. Merry S. E. Legal Pluralism. Law and Society Review, 1988, no. 22. 
11. Pospisil L. Corrections of a Reappraisal of Leopold Pospisil. Journal of Legal Pluralism, 2001, no. 28. 
12. Pospisil L. Antropology of Law. A Comparative Theory. New Haven, 1974. 
13. Pospisil L. Corrections of a Reappraisal of Leopold Pospisil. The Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law, 2001, vol. 33, iss. 46. 
14. Biryukov S. V. To a Question of Legal Pluralism. Journal of Russian Law, 2016, no. 2, pp. 16—26. (In Russ.) 
15. Babich I. L. Pravovoy plyuralizm na Severo-Zapadnom Kavkaze. Moscow, 2000. 
16. Babich I. L. Pravovoy monizm v Severnoy Osetii. Moscow, 2000. 
17. Krasheninnikova N. A. Pravovaya kul'tura sovremennoy Indii: innovatsionnye i traditsionnye cherty. Moscow, 2009. 
18. Amhlaigh C. M. Does Legal Theory Have a Pluralism Probleme? The Oxford Handbook of Global Legal Pluralism. Oxford, 2020. 
19. Alekseev S. S. General theory of law. Vol. I. Moscow, 1981. (In Russ.) 
20. Mal'tsev G. V. Ocherki istorii rannego prava i gosudarstva. Moscow, 2010. 
21. Polyakov A. V. Obshchaya teoriya prava: fenomenologo-kommunikativnyy podkhod. St. Petersburg, 2001. 
22. Yavich L. S. Law and socialism. Moscow, 1982. (In Russ.) 
23. Tamanaha B. Z. The folly of the “social scientific” concept of legal pluralism. Journal of Law and Society, 1993, no. 20. 
24. Tamanaha B. Z. Ponimanie pravovogo plyuralizma: ot proshlogo k nastoyashchemu, ot lokal'nogo k global'nomu. In: Paneyakh E. L., Kadnikova A. M. (eds). Pravo i pravoprimenenie v zerkale sotsial'nykh nauk: khrestomatiya sovremennykh tekstov. Moscow, 2014. 
25. Tamanaha B. Z. Legal Pluralism Explained. History, Theory, Consequences. Oxford, 2020. 
26. Kovler A. I. Antropologiya prava i pravovoy plyuralizm (prava cheloveka i prava narodov). In: Novikova N. I. (ed.). Olen' vsegda prav. Issledovaniya po yuridicheskoy antropologii. Moscow, 2003. 
27. Rudkovskiy V. A. Gosudarstvotsentrizm i plyuralizm kak modeli organizatsii pravovoy zhizni. Vestnik Volgogradskoy akademii MVD Rossii, 2020, no. 3. 
28. Losev A. F. The Dialectic of myth. Moscow, 2001. (In Russ.) 
29. Vengerov A. B. Sotsialisticheskiy plyuralizm v kontseptsii pravovogo gosudarstva. Sovetskoe gosudarstvo i pravo, 1989, no. 6. 
30. Polishchuk N. P. Mirovozzrencheskaya i metodologicheskaya sushchnost' plyuralizma v sovremennoy nemarksistskoy filosofii. Dr. diss. thesis. Kiev, 1989. 
31. Ehrlich S. Pluralism on and off Course. Oxford; New York, 1982. 
32. McLennan G. Pluralism. Minneapolis, 1995. 
33. Ben-Rafael E., Sternberg Y. (eds). Comparing modernities: pluralism versus homogenity. Leiden; Boston, 2005. 
34. James W. Vselennaya s plyuralisticheskoy tochki zreniya. Transl. from English. Moscow, 1911. 
35. Tiunova L. Plyuralizm interesov i pravoponimanie. Izvestiya vuzov. Pravovedenie, 1990, no. 1. 
36. Ebzeev B. S. Lichnost' i gosudarstvo v Rossii: vzaimnaya otvetstvennost' i konstitutsionnye obyazannosti. Moscow, 2017. 
37. Grushin B. A. Mnenie o mire i mir mneniy. Problemy metodologii issledovaniya obshchestvennogo mneniya. Moscow, 1967. 
38. Ekimov A. I. Interesy i pravo v sotsialisticheskom obshchestve. Leningrad, 1984. 
39. Ekimov A. I. Metodologicheskie problemy ponimaniya prava. Raboty raznykh let. Moscow, 2022. 
40. Aristotle. Nicomachean Ethics. In: Aristotle. Essays. Vol. 4. Moscow, 1984. (In Russ.) 
41. Ol P. A. Pravoponimanie: ot plyuralizma k dvuedinstvu. St. Petersburg, 2005. 
42. Rabinovich P. Pravoponimanie: sushchnost', prichiny i neizbezhnost' plyuralizma. Pravo Ukrainy, 2011, no. 1. 
43. Adygezalova G. E. O pravovom plyuralizme kak konstitutsionnom printsipe. Ocherki noveyshey kriminalistiki, 2019, no. 4. 
44. Tonkov E. N. Istochniki prava v “rossiyskom pravovom realizme”. Vestnik Universiteta imeni O. E. Kutafina, 2020, no. 11. 
45. Carbonnier J. Sociologie juridique. Transl. by V. A. Tumanov. Moscow, 1986. (In Russ.) 
46. Zemchenkov N. F. Pravovoy smysl printsipa plyuralizma. Izvestiya TRTU, 2005, no. 6. 
47. Mikhaylovskiy A. V. Ocherki filosofii prava. Vol. 1. Tomsk, 1914. 
48. Hoecke M. V. Law as Communication. Transl. from English. St. Petersburg, 2012. 288 p. 
49. Norgren J., Nanda S. American Cultural Pluralism and Law. Westport; London, 1996. 
50. Habermas J. Die Einbeziehung des Anderen: Studien zur Politischen Theorie. St. Petersburg, 2001. (In Russ.) 
51. Rawls J. A Theory of Justice. Transl. from English. Novosibirsk, 1995. (In Russ.) 
52. Tishkov V. A. Rekviem po etnosu: issledovaniya po sotsial'no-kul'turnoy antropologii. Moscow, 2003. 
53. Malakhov V. Ponaekhali tut... Ocherki o natsionalizme, rasizme i kul'turnom plyuralizme. Moscow, 2007. 
54. Berman G. J. Law and Revolution: The Formation of the Western Legal Tradition. Transl. from English. 2nd ed. Moscow, 1998. 624 p. (In Russ.)

Comments

No posts found

Write a review
Translate