Wording in international law

Leiden Journal of International Law

Volumn 25, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 575-602

  D'Aspremont, Jean ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

international law; international legal scholarship; interpretative community; legal science; paradigmatic revolution; production of knowledge; semantic instability; semantic persuasiveness; textual aesthetics; wordfare

Indexed keywords

EID: 84864563370     PISSN: 09221565     EISSN: 14789698     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0922156512000283     Document Type: Review

References (56)

1. M. Koskenniemi, The Gentle Civilizer of Nations: The Rise and Fall of International Law 1870-1960 (2001), 39.
2. S. Fish, Is There a Text in This Class? The Authority of Interpretative Community (1982)
3. S. Fish, DoingWhat Comes Naturally: Change, Rhetoric, and the Practice of Theory in Literary and Legal Studies (1989)
4. see the remarks formulated by I.Venzke, 'Legal Contestation about "EnemyCombatants" on the Exercise of Power in Legal Interpretation', (2009) 5 Journal of International Law and International Relations 155.
5. L. van den Herik, 'LJIL in the Cyberage', (2012) 25 LJIL 1, at 1-8.
6. See also J. d'Aspremont, 'In Defense of the Hazardous Tool of Legal Blogging', EJIL:Talk !, 6 January 2011, available at www.ejiltalk.org/in- defense-of-the-hazardous-tool-of-legal-blogging.
7. L. Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations (translated by G. E. M. Anscombe) (2001).
8. The abandonment of the varieties of philosophical foundationalism is described in R. Rorty's famous book, Philosophy and theMirror of Nature, 25th Anniversary Edition (2009).
9. ICJ, Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. Italy: Greece intervening), 3 February 2012, available at www.icj-cij.org.
10. see C. Steer, 'Non-State Participants in International Criminal Law', in J. d'Aspremont (ed.), Non-State Participants in the International Legal Order (2011), 295-310.
11. I. Venzke, How Interpretation Makes International Law: On Semantic Authority, Legal Change and Normative Twists (2012)
12. see also I. Venzke, 'The Role of International Courts as Interpreters and Developers of the Law: Working Out the Jurisgenerative Practice of Interpretation', 34 Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Review (2012), available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract-id= 1868423.
13. see N. Luhmann, A Sociological Theory of Law (1985) and Law as a Social System (translated by Klaus A. Ziegert) (2003);
14. see also G. Teubner, Law as an Autopoietic System (1992).
15. J. d'Aspremont, 'The International Legal Scholar in Palestine: Hurling Stones under the Guise of Legal Forms? A Talk with Martti Koskenniemi and Mudar Kassis', 19 April 2011, available at SSRN, http://ssrn. com/abstract=1846867.
16. The concept of lawfare is said to have been coined by C. J. Dunlap, 'Lawfare Today: A Perspective', (2008) 3 Yale Journal of International Affairs 146. On that concept
17. see M. Kearney, 'Lawfare, Legitimacy and Resistance: TheWeak and the Law', available at SSRN, http://ssrn.com/abstract=1772806.
18. J. Raz, 'TheNature and Theory of Law', in J.Coleman (ed.), Hart's Postscript: Essays on the Postscript to 'The Concept of Law' (2001)
19. see the insightful transposition by N. Onuf, 'Do Rules SayWhat They Do? From Ordinary Language to International Law', (1985) 26 Harv. ILJ 385.
20. J. d'Aspremont, 'Softness in International Law: A Self-Serving Quest for New Legal Materials', (2008) 9 EJIL 1075.
21. see, generally, J. L. Austin, How to Do Things withWords (1975
22. J. Searle, Speech Acts (1969), 12.
23. M. Foucault, Discipline and Punish (1977), 27:
24. P. Bourdieu, 'The Force of Law: Toward a Sociology of the Juridical Field', (1987) 38 Hastings Law Journal 814
25. M. Koskenniemi, 'International Law and Hegemony: A Reconfiguration', (2004) 17 Cambridge Review of International Affairs 197, at 199.
26. See, generally, K. Popper, The Logic of Scientific Discovery (2002).
27. M. Hesselink, 'A European Legal Science?', Centre for the Study of European Contract LawWorking Paper Series, No. 2008/02, at 12.
28. B. Latour, Science in Action (1987).
29. L. V. Prott, 'Argumentation in International Law', (1991) 5 Argumentation 299, at 299 ('Persuasive discourse, or argumentation, has been a key technique in the development of international law').
30. F. Kratochwil, 'Is International Law "Proper" Law?, (1983) 69 Archiv fur Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie 13.
31. see J. d'Aspremont, Formalism and the Sources of International Law (2011).
32. B. Latour, The Making of Law:An Ethnography of the Conseil d'Etat (translated by M. Brilman and A. Pottage) (2009), 260
33. M.Waibel, 'Demystifying the Art of Interpretation', (2011) 22 EJIL 571, at 571-88.
34. M. Greenberg, 'Legislation as Communication? Legal Interpretation and the Study of Linguistic Communication', in A.Marmor and S. Soames (eds.), Philosophical Foundations of Language in the Law (2011), 217.
35. F. Rodell, 'Goodbye to Law Reviews', (1936) 23 VLR 38
36. F. Rodell, 'Goodbye to Law Reviews - Revisited', (1962) 48 VLR 279.
37. E. Jouannet, 'Présentation critique', in M. Koskenniemi, La politique du droit international (2007), 32
38. see also I. de la Rasilla delMoral, 'Martti Koskenniemi and the Spirit of the Beehive in International Law', (2010) 10 Global Jurist 1;
39. J. von Bernstorff, 'Sisyphus as an International Lawyer: OnMartti Koskenniemi's "From Apologia to Utopia" and the Place of Law in International Politics', (2006) 7 German Law Journal 1015, at 1029-31;
40. J. A. Beckett, '"Rebel without a Cause": Martti Koskenniemi and theCritical Legal Project', (2006) 7 German Law Review 1045
41. A. Ross, 'Tû-tû', (1956-57) 70 Harvard Law Review 812, especially at 813.
42. F. Kastner, 'The Paradoxes of Justice: The Ultimate Differencebetween a PhilosophicalandSociological ObservationofLaw', inO. PerezandG.Teubner (eds.), Paradoxes and Inconsistencies in the Law (2005), 168-70.
43. P. Allott, Eunomia (2001), xxvii
44. J. Raz, Between Authority and Interpretation (2009), 31
45. M. Greenberg, 'How FactsMake Law',UCLA School of Law, Public Law&Legal Theory Research PaperNo. 05-22, at 173.
46. T. Skouteris, TheNotion of Progress in International Law Discourse (2008), Chapter 3
47. later published as The Notion of Progress in International Law Discourse (2010).
48. D. Kennedy, 'A NewWorld Order: Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow', (1994) 4 Transnational Legal and Contemporary Problems 329, at 336;
49. S. Marks, The Riddle of All Constitutions (2003), 146.
50. F. Megret, 'International Law as Law', in J. Crawford and M. Koskenniemi (eds.), Cambridge Companion to International Law (2011), available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract-id=1672824, at 8-9.
51. See, e.g., P. Sands, LawlessWorld: America and theMaking and Breaking of Global Rules (2005).
52. F. Ost and M. van de Kerchove, 'De la scène au balcon: D'oùvient la science du droit?', in F. Chazel and J. Commaille (eds.), Normes juridiques et régulation sociale (1991), 68;
53. S. Santos, Towards a New Common Sense: Law, Science and Politics in the Paradigmatic Transition (1995);
54. O. Spiermann, International Legal Argument in the Permanent Court of International Justice (2005)
55. J.W. Salmond, First Principles of Jurisprudence (1893), 1.
56. N.Onuf, 'Law-Making in the Global Community', reproduced inN. Onuf, International Legal Theory, Essays and Engagements (1966-2006) (2008), 63