A DISCUSSION OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LAW AND IDEOLOGY AND ITS IMPACT ON THE PLURALISM OF LEGAL REASONING

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 PhD Candidate in Private Law, Faculty of Administrative Sciences and Economics, Isfahan University, Isfahan, Iran

2 Associate Professor of Private Law, Faculty of Administrative Sciences and Economics, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran

3 Professor of Philosophy, Faculty of Literature, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran

Abstract

Law is essentially a social phenomenon and, therefore, in full association with other social sciences. To understand a legal rule must be interpreted and for interpretation we have to argue about that. Therefore, there are a strong relationship between reasoning, interpretation and law. Furthermore, the three categories of base, source and purpose of the legal statement are considered as the contributors to each legal system. The purpose of this study is to explore influence of ideology on different interpretations of same legal rule. We discuss  problem, social justice and fairness in law, the origins of different sometimes conflicting rules in the same subjects. This can damage the realization of the order as one of the goals of the legal system. This phenomenon is explained as pluralism of legal argument, which is shaped by various factors including ideology as the most notable. The mutual relation between law and ideology in legal pluralism is controversial. It can be concluded that depending on what the ideology governing the mind of a legal practitioner is, his kind of argument in the interpretation of the legal rules will be equally different.

Keywords


  1. الف) فارسی

    1. آقایی، کامران (1388)، مکتب‌های تفسیری در حقوق بر بنیاد هرمنوتیک حقوقی، چ اول، تهران: میزان.
    2. بادینی، حسن؛ مؤمنی، خسرو (1392)، «رویکردی نو برای اثبات جریان قاعدة لاضرر در احکام عدمی در زمینة مسؤولیت مدنی»، فصلنامة حقوق دانشکدة حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دورة 43، ش 3، ص 19ـ31.
    3.  بشلر، ژان (1370)، ایدئولوژی چیست؟ نقدی بر ایدئولوژی های غربی، ترجمة علی اسدی، چ اول تهران: شرکت سهامی انتشار.
    4.   بودُن، ریمون (1388)، ایدئولوژی در منشأ معتقدات، ترجمة ایرج علی‌آبادی، تهران: چاپ شادرنگ، چ اول.
    5.  جعفری تبار، حسن (1388)، فلسفة تفسیری حقوق، چ اول، تهران: شرکت سهامی انتشار.
    6. حاجی شعبانیان، نسرین (1391)،دربارة مفهوم ایدئولوژی، قسمت اول، حکمت و اندیشه، فرهنگ عمومی، ش 14.
    7. دانش‌پژوه، مصطفی (1391)، «قلمرو اجرا و تفسیر قواعد حقوقی»،چ اول، تهران: جنگل، پژوهشگاه حوزه و دانشگاه، تهران.
    8. دانشور، فرشته (1395)، «بازخوانی رابطة حقوق و ایدئولوژی در پرتو مطالعات میان‌رشته‌ای»، تهران: فصلنامة علمی- پژوهشی مطالعات میان‌رشته‌ای در علوم انسانی، دورة هشتم، ش 4.
    9. راسخ، محمد (1387)، «نوبت نسل سوم حقوقی»، پژوهش حقوق و سیاست، سال دهم، ش 25.
    10. رولان، نوربر (1394)،انسان‌شناسی حقوقی، ترجمة امیر نیک‌پی، چ اول، تهران: نگاه معاصر.
    11.  سلجوقی، محمود (1390)،جستارهایی دربارة فهم آدمی، چ اول، تهران: میزان.
    12. الشریف، محمدمهدی (1392)، منطق حقوق، پژوهشی در منطق حاکم بر تفسیر و استدلال حقوقی، چ دوم، تهران: انتشارات شرکت سهامی انتشار.
    13. الشریف، محمدمهدی، آرایی، حمید (1396)، «پلورالیسم استدلال حقوقی در پرتو تفسیرهای متعارض»، مجلة حقوق تطبیقی، 107.
    14. شهابی، مهدی (1397)، فلسفة حقوق، مبانی نظری تحول نظام حقوق از حقوق سنتی تا حقوق مدرن، چ دوم، تهران: سازمان انتشارات پژوهشگاه فرهنگ و اندیشة اسلامی.
    15.  کاتوزیان، ناصر (1385)، فلسفة حقوق، منابع حقوق، ج 2 و 3، چ سوم، تهران: شرکت سهامی انتشار.
    16. کیوانفر، شهرام (1390)، مبانی فلسفی تفسیر قانون، چ اول تهران: شرکت سهامی انتشار.

    ب) عربی

    1.  الشاطبی (1417ق)، الموافقات، المجلّد الثانی، الطبعه الأولی المملکه العربیّه السّعودیّه، دار ابن عفّان.

    ج) لاتین

    1. Alexander, James (2014),The Major Ideologies of Liberalism, Socialism and Conservatism”, Political Study Association, doi: 10.1111/1467-9248.12136.
    2. Alexander, Larry (2018), ”Law and Politics: what is their relations”, 41 Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy355.
    3. Ash, Elliott, Chen, Daniel L., Naidu, Suresh (2017),“The Impact of Legal Schools of Thought”, European Research Council (Grant No. 614708), Swiss National Science, Foundation (Grant Nos. 100018-152678 and 106014-150820), and Agence Nationale de la Recherche.
    4. Avbelj, Matej (2006),the EU and the Many Faces of Legal Pluralism: Toward a Coherent or Uniform EU Legal Order,CYELP 2 , pp. 377-391.
    5. Benda-Beckman, Keebet von (2002), “Globalization and Legal Pluralism”, 4 Int'l L.F. D. Int'l 19, 25.
    6. Benda-Beckmann, Franz von (2002), “who’s Afraid of Legal Pluralism?”, XIIIth Congress of the Commission on Folk Law and Legal Pluralism, 7-10 April, Chiangmei, Thailand.
    7. Benesh, Sara C. & Czarnezki, Jason J. (2009), “The Ideology of Legal Interpretation”, 29 Wash. U. J. L. & Pol’y, pp. 113-132.
    8. Bertea, Stefano (2008), “Rhetoric and the Rule of Law: an author's day with Neil MacCormick: Law and legal reasoning”, Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly 59:1, Legal Q. 5, 20.
    9. Blumenthal A. Jeremy (2002), “Law and Social Science in the twenty- first century”, Southern California Interdisciplinary Law Journal, Vol. 12,1.
    10. Caldwell, Bruce(1997), “Hayek and socialism”, In, Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 35, No. 4, pp.1860, 1875.
    11. Cerar, Miro (2009), “The Relationship between Law and Politics”, Annual Survey of International & Comparative Law, Vol. 15, | Issue 1, Article 3.
    12. Cirkovic, Elena (2004), “Global Legal Pluralism and Multipolar Conflicts: A Review of Oren Perez's "Sensitivity and Global Legal Pluralism: Rethinking the Trade and Environment Conflict”, Oxford and Portland, Oregon, Hart Publishing.
    13. Collins Hugh (1988). Marxism and Law, London, Oxford University Press, 1e edition.
    14. Conway, Paul (2002), “Syntactic Ambiguity”, Published by the Law and Justice Foundation of NSW.
    15. Dworkin. Ronald(1994), L’empire du droit. Traduit de l’américain par Elisabeth Soubrenie. Paris. PUF. 1e édition. 1994. pp. 36 et 37
    16. Dworkin. Ronald(1995), Prendre les droits au sérieux. Paris. PUF. 1e édition. 1995. pp. 74 et 75
    17. Fasso, Guido (1976), Histoire de la philosophie du droit, XIXe et XXe siècle; traduit de l’italien par Catherine Rouffet, 1e édition, Paris: L. G. D. J.
      1. Frydman, Benoit et Guy Haarscher (2002), Philosophie du droit; 2e édition, Paris : Dalloz.
      2. Gerring, John (1997), “ideology: a defitional analysis”, political research quarterly, Vol.50, No. 4, .pp. 958-994.
      3. Gordon, Robert W (2011), “law and ideology”, TIKKUN, VOL. 3, No. 1.
      4. Gramsci, A. (1971), Selections from the Prison Notebooks of Antonio Gramsci, eds. Q. Hoare and G.,Nowell – Smith, London: Lawrence & Wishart.
      5. Halpin, Andrew (2006),” ideology and law”, Journal of Political Ideologies, Vol. 11.
      6. Hanson, Jon (2011), “Ideology, Psychology, and Law”, Harvard Law School Public Law & Legal Theory,Working Paper Series Paper No. 12-18.     
      7. Hossain, F. M. Anayet (2014), “A Critical Analysis of Empiricism”, Open Journal of Philosophy, 4, pp. 225-230
      8. Hunt, Alan (2010), “Marxist Theory of Law”, A Companion to Philosophy of Law and Legal Theory,Second edition, edited by Dennis Patterson, A John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., Publication.
      9. Kahn, R., & Kersch (2006), “the supreme court and American political development”, Lawrence: University press of Kansas.
      10. Lukes Steven; “The meanings of Individualism”, In, Journal of the history of Ideas, vol. 32, N. 1, 1971, pp. 45-66
      11. Manko, R. T. (2016). “Ideology and Legal Interpretation: Some Theoretical Considerations”. In Constitutional Values in Contemporary Legal Space (Vol. I, pp. 117-126).
      12. Mitchell, Catherine (2007), “Interpretation of Contracts (Current Controversies in Law)”,First Published, UK, Rutledge- Cavendish.
      13. Novkov, Julie (2008), “law and political ideologies”, the oxford handbook of Law and Politics, Edited by Keith E. Whittington R. Daniel Kelemen and Gregory A. Caldeira, Oxford University Press.
      14. Patrono, Mario (2014), Hans Kelsen: A Peacemaker Throgh Law, 45 VUWLR.
      15. Pino Giorgio (1999), “the place of legal positivism in contemporary constitutional states”, Law and Philosophy 18: 513–536, Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.
      16. Pisier-Kouchner, Evelyne (1972), Le service public dans la théorie de l’Etat de Léon Duguit, Librairie générale de droit et de jurisprudence
      17. Posner, Richard A (2004), The Law and Economics of Contract interpretation, U Chicago Law and Economics, Olin Working. Paper n° 229, pp. 1-51
      18. Posner, Richard A. (1987), Legal Formalism, Legal Realism, and the Interpretation of Statutes and the Constitution”, In. Case Western Reserve Law Review, Vol. 37, No.° 2, pp. 179-217
      19. Raz, Joseph (2003), About Morality and the Nature of Law, American Journal of Jurisprudence, Vol. 48.
      20. Richards, Robert J. (1993),”ideology and history of science”, biology and philosophy 8: 103- 108, University of Chicago,1126E, 59th St.
      21. Sally, E. Merry (1998), legal pluralism, in law & society review, Vol. 22.
      22. Scharffs, Brett G. (2004), “The Character of Legal Reasoning”, 61 Wash. & Lee L. Rev. 733, 788.
      23. Schiff Berman, Paul (2001), “Global Legal Pluralism”, 80 S. Cal. L. Rev. 1155, 1238.
      24. Stone Sweet, Alec (2009), “Sur la constitutionnalisation de la convention européenne des droits de l’Homme : cinquante ans après son instalation, la cour européenne des droits de l’homme conçu comme une cour constitutionnelle”, In. Rev. trim. dr. h. No.° 80, pp. 923-944
      25. Tamanaha Z. Brian (2008), “Understanding Legal Pluralism: Past to Present, Local to Global”, the Julius Stone Institute of Jurisprudence, Faculty of Law, University of Sydney.
      26. Tontti, Jarko (2001), «European Legal Pluralism as a rebirth of IUS Commune », retfærd nr, 94, argang.
      27. Tumonis, Vitalius (2012), “Legal realism and Judicial Decision-Making, In. Jurisprudence, 19 (4), pp. 1361-1382
      28. Van Dijk Teun A. (2007), Ideology and discourse, A Multidisciplinary Introduction, Pompeu Fabra University, Barcelona.
      29. Vanderlinde, Jacques (1972), "Le pluralism jurique, Essai de synthése" ; In le pluralisme juridique ; Etudes publiée sous la direction de John Gilissen,1e édition, Bruxelles : edition de L’Université de Bruxelles.
      30. Viney, Geneviève (1977), "De la responsabilité personnelle à la répartition des risques"  , In. La responsabilité. Archives de philosophie du droit, Paris, Édition Sirey, No.° 22
      31. Wallers, Gilles (2010), Entre esprit et lettre: Le juge et l’interprétation du contrat en droit français et en droit américain (une étude comparative), Master 2 Recherche–Études Juridiques Comparative, Université Paris I Panthéon-Sorbonne.
      32. Wardle, Ben (2016), The Four Axes of Legal Ideology,A dissertation in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, Griffith Law School, Griffith University, Nathan, Queensland, Australia.
      33. Zoran, Jelić (2001), “an observation on the theory of law of Hans Kelsen”, FACTA UNIVERSITATIS, Series: Law and Politics, Vol. 1, No 5, pp. 551 – 570.