Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T00:59:47.616Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparative Law's Coming of Age? Twenty Years after Critical Comparisons

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 March 2019

Peer Zumbansen

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

From its first line, Günter Frankenberg's article Critical Comparisons, published twenty years ago, leaves no doubt as to its radical claim and aspiration. Nothing short of attempting to “re-think” comparative law, the article sets out to attack many of the dearly held beliefs in the scholarship and practice of comparative law. The beliefs, the history, the believers, their work and struggles – they are all there. Frankenberg plows through them in order to lay bare what he conceives of as being an incorrectly defended myth of scholarly objectivity among many of the field's pioneers and contemporary protagonists. Not being alone in his struggle of fiercely assailing the citadels of a nearly century-old comparativist scholarly venture, his crucial contribution to the field cannot now be denied. Whether we consider its open, frank, almost casual style, or its wide reaching theoretical reach, Critical Comparisons remains one of the most eminent articulations of the crisis of comparative law in its first century. At the time of the article's 20th birthday, it is time to recollect, reassess and reconsider its main arguments and to play them back to the author and his readers. After a brief reconstruction of the article's main contentions (Part B), this brief homage will contextualize the article within a larger attempt among comparativists and legal theorists to work towards a transnational legal science (Part C).

Type
Articles
Information
German Law Journal , Volume 6 , Issue 7 , 01 July 2005 , pp. 1073 - 1084
Copyright
Copyright © 2005 by German Law Journal GbR 

References

1 Frankenberg, Günter, Critical Comparisons: Re-thinking Comparative Law, 26 Harv. Int'l L.J. 411-455 (1985).Google Scholar

2 See, e.g., Hill, Jonathan, Comparative Law, Law Reform and Legal Theory, 9 Oxford J. Leg. Stud. 101-115 (1989). More recently, see Ralf Michaels, Im Westen Nichts Neues? Zum Stand der Rechtsvergleichung 100 Jahre nach dem Pariser Kongress, 66 Rabels Zeitschrift für ausländisches und internationales Privatrecht 97 (2002); Ralf Michaels, Book Review – Annelise Riles (ed.) Rethinking the Masters of Comparative Law (Hart Publishing 2001), 4 German Law Journal 411-417 (2003); Ralf Michaels, Fünf Minuten Rechtsvergleichung, 4 Rechtsgeschichte 239-242 (2004).Google Scholar

3 For a collection of contemporary explorations into the contested discipline, see Comparative Legal Studies: Traditions and Transitions (Pierre Legrand and Roderick Munday eds., 2004). Certainly, one could also consider how the writing on the “masters of comparative law” unfolds in writing about comparative law today. See Michaels, Book Review, supra note 2.Google Scholar

4 Frankenberg, , supra note 1, at 418-9; Harold Cooke Gutteridge, An Introduction to the Comparative Method of Legal Study and Research (1949). However, some have observed that the Cinderella debate regarding comparative law – while still echoing here and there – has come to and end. See Vernon Valentine Palmer, From Lerotholi to Lando: Some Examples of Comparative Law Methodology, 4 Global Jurist Frontiers 1-29 (2004), available at http://www.bepress.com/gj/frontiers/.Google Scholar

5 Frankenberg, , supra note 1, at 419.Google Scholar

6 See the critique by Harry Arthurs. Arthurs, Harry, Poor Canadian Legal Education: So Near to Wall Street, So Far from God, in: 38 Osgoode Hall Law Journal 381 (2000).Google Scholar

7 Frankenberg, , supra note 1, at 430-1.Google Scholar

8 Id., at 431.Google Scholar

9 Id., at 433.Google Scholar

10 Id.Google Scholar

11 Id.Google Scholar

12 Id., at 445.Google Scholar

13 Id., at 434.Google Scholar

14 Id., at 436.Google Scholar

15 Id., at 438.Google Scholar

16 Id.Google Scholar

17 Id.Google Scholar

18 Compare Zweigert and Kötz, An Introduction to Comparative Law 25 (T. Weir trans., 3d ed. 1977).Google Scholar

19 For a critique, see, e.g., Zumbansen, Europe's Darker Legacies. Notes on ‘Mirror Reflections', the ‘Constitution as Fetish', and other such linkages between the Past and the Future, 43 Osgoode Hall Law Journal (forthcoming 2005).Google Scholar

20 Klaus Peter Berger, The creeping codification of Transnational Law (1996).Google Scholar

21 For the field of labor law, see the harsh critique by Manfred Weiss. Manfred Weiss, The Future of Comparative Labor Law as an Academic Discipline and as a Practical Tool, 25 Comparative Labor Law and Policy Journal 169-181 (2003). Weiss argues for a much wider functional approach, that reaches out to the larger regulatory, hard and soft law, environment as well as to underlying methodological questions and concerns of comparing different functions. See also William Scheuermann, Franz Neumann – A Legal Theorist of Globalization?, 35 Kritische Justiz 79-89 (2002); A. Claire Cutler, Private Authority, Public Power (2003).Google Scholar

22 Frankenberg, , supra, note 1, at 436 (with references to Zweigert and Kötz, supra note 18).Google Scholar

23 Id. at 439.Google Scholar

24 Id. at 440.Google Scholar

25 Id.Google Scholar

26 Id. at 441.Google Scholar

27 Id.Google Scholar

28 Id.Google Scholar

29 See Hay, Douglas, Time, Inequality, and Law=s Violence, in Law=s Violence 141-173 (Austin Sarat and Thomas Kearns eds., 1992); Cornelia Vismann, Jurisprudence: A Transfer Science, 10 Law and Critique 279-286 (1999); Costas Douzinas, Violence, Justice, Deconstruction, 6 German Law Journal 171-178 (2005).Google Scholar

30 See, e.g., Engle, Sally Merry, Anthropology, Law, and Transnational Processes, 21 Annual Review of Anthropology 357-379 (1992).Google Scholar

31 A. Claire Cutler, Private Power, Public Authority (2003).Google Scholar

32 Koh, Harold Hongju, Transnational Legal Process, 75 Nebraska Law Review 181-206 (1996).Google Scholar

33 See Kerry Rittich, Recharacterizing Restructuring (2002); Kerry Rittich, Enchantments of Reason/Coercions in Law, 57 Miami Law Review 727-742 (2003).Google Scholar

34 Posner, Richard, Creating a Legal Framework for Economic Development, 13 World Bank Observer 1-11 (1998).Google Scholar

35 Rittich, supra. note 33.Google Scholar

36 This theme is unfolded by Frankenberg himself. See Günter Frankenberg, The Learning Sovereign, in 2 Annual of German & European Law 2004 (Russell Miller and Peer Zumbansen eds., forthcoming 2005).Google Scholar

37 Hay, Douglas, Time, Inequality, and Law's Violence, in Law's Violence 141-173 (Austin Sarat and Thomas Kearns eds., 1992).Google Scholar

38 Frankenberg, , supra note 1, at 447.Google Scholar

39 Teubner, Gunther and Zumbansen, Peer, Rechtsentfremdungen: Über den Mehrwert des Zwölften Kamels, 21 Zeitschrift für Rechtssoziologie 189-215 (2000) [English version: Alienating Justice: On the Social Surplus of the Twelfth Camel, in Consequences of Legal Autopoiesis 21-44 (Nelken and Priban eds., 2001)].Google Scholar

40 See the illuminating analysis in Cutler, supra note 21.Google Scholar

41 Most recently, see Duncan Kennedy, The Disenchantment of Logical Formal Legal Rationality, 55 Hastings Law Journal 1031-1076 (2004).Google Scholar

42 See Wiethölter, Rudolf, Proceduralization of the Category of Law, in Critical Legal Thought: An American-German Debate 501-510 (Christian Joerges and David M. Trubek eds., 1985); Teubner, Gunther, Juridification – Concepts, Aspects, Limits, Solutions, in, Juridification of Social Spheres 3-48 (Gunther Teubner ed., 1987); Peer Zumbansen, Ordnungsmuster im modernen Wohlfahrtsstaat. Lernerfahrungen zwischen Staat, Gesellschaft und Vertrag (2000).Google Scholar

43 Frankenberg, , supra note 1, at 452.Google Scholar

44 See Koskenniemi, Martti, “The Lady Doth Protest Too Much.” Kosovo and the Turn to Ethics in International Law, 65 Modern Law Review 159-175 (2002); Martti Koskenniemi, Book Review – Giovanna Boradori (ed.), Philosophy in a Time of Terror. Dialogues with Jürgen Habermas and Jacques Derrida (2003), 4 German Law Journal 1087-1094 (2003), available at http://www.germanlawjournal.com/pdf/Vol04No10/PDF_Vol_04_No_10_1087-1094_Legal_Culture_Koskenniemi.pdf.Google Scholar

45 Brecht, Bertolt, Die Horatier und die Kuriatier, in Der Ozeanflug/ Die Horatier und die Kuriatier/Die MAßNAHME 29 (1980).Google Scholar

46 Müller, Heiner, Der Kuratier, in Werke 4: Die Stücke 2 (2001).Google Scholar

47 remarkably, Most, see Reinhart Koselleck, Vergangene Zukunft der frühen Neuzeit, in Vergangene Zukunft. Zur Semantik geschichtlicher Zeiten 17, 18 (1979).Google Scholar

48 See Philip Jessup, Transnational Law 6-13 (1957). For a restatement of this struggle, see, e.g., Neil Walker, Postnational Constitutionalism and the Problem of Translation, in Constitutionalism Beyond the State 27 (J.H.H. Weiler and M. Wind eds., 2003); Robert Wai, Transnational Liftoff and Juridical Touchdown: The Regulatory Function of Private International Law in an Era of Globalization, 40 Columbia Journal of Transnational Law 209-274 (2002); Peer Zumbansen, Transnational Law, in Encyclopedia of Comparative Law (Jan Smits ed., forthcoming 2005).Google Scholar

49 See Michaels, Ralf, The Re-State-ment of Non-State Law, Wayne Law Review (forthcoming 2005).Google Scholar

50 Id.Google Scholar

51 Wiethölter, Rudolf, Recht-Fertigungen eines Gesellschaftsrechts, in Rechtsverfassungsrecht: RechtFertigungen zwischen Privatrechtsdogmatik und Gesellschaftstheorie (Christian Joerges and Gunther Teubner eds., 2003).Google Scholar

52 Gordon, Robert, Critical Legal Histories, 36 Stan. L. Rev. 57 (1984).Google Scholar

53 Unger, Roberto Mangabeira, The Critical Legal Studies Movement, 96 Harv. L. Rev. 563-675 (1983).Google Scholar

54 Supra, note 32.Google Scholar

55 See Sally Falk Moore, Law and Social Change: the semi-autonomous field as an appropriate subject of study, 7 Law and Society Review 719-746 (1973); Laurence R. Helfer, Constitutional Analogies in the International Legal System, 37 Loy. L. A. L. Rev. 193-236 (2003); Russell A. Miller, Lords of Democracy: The Judicialization of ‘Pure Politics’ in the United States and in Germany, 61 Washington & Lee Law Review 587-662 (2003); Paul Schiff Berman, From International Law to Law and Globalization, 43 Columbia Journal of Transnational Law 485 (2005); Michaels, supra note 49; Viktor Winkler, Dubious Heritage: The German Debate on the Anti-Discrimination Law, Iowa Journal of Transnational Law and Contemporary Problems (forthcoming 2005).Google Scholar

56 See Andreas Fischer-Lescano and Gunther Teubner, Regime-Collisions: The Vain Search for Legal Unity in the Fragmentation of Global Law, 25 Michigan J. Int'l L. 999-1045 (2004).Google Scholar

57 Zumbansen, Peer, Piercing the Legal Veil: Commercial Arbitration and Transnational Law, 8 European Law Journal 400-432 (2002); Peer Zumbansen, Sustaining Paradox Boundaries: Perspectives on the Internal Affairs in Domestic and International Law, 15 European Journal of International Law 197-211 (2004).Google Scholar

58 Helfer, , supra note 55; Anne-Marie Slaughter, A New World Order (2004).Google Scholar

59 Alan Watson, Legal Transplants (2d ed. 1993). For a recent self-reassessment, see Alan Watson, Legal Transplants and European Private Law, 4 Electronic Journal of Comparative Law (December 2000), available at http://www.ejcl.org/ejcl/44/44-2.html (defending his approach against the attack of Pierre Legrand).Google Scholar

60 Teubner, Gunther, Legal Irritants: How Unifying Law Ends Up in New Differences, in Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage 417-441 (Peter Hall and David Soskice. eds., 2001).Google Scholar