Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
SLX-Digitalkonferenz: Zukunftswerkstatt 2024

Mehr Umsatz mit Top-Kontakten

Am 7. Mai erfahren Sie, wie Vertriebsteams Leadgenerierung, Leadnurturing und Leadstrategien effizient steuern können.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Erschienen in:
Buchtitelbild

2020 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

Debating Legal Pluralism and Constitutionalism: New Trajectories for Legal Theory in the Global Age

verfasst von : Guillaume Tusseau

Erschienen in: Debating Legal Pluralism and Constitutionalism

Verlag: Springer International Publishing

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Globalisation has disrupted most of the intellectual and practical tools jurists had devised. Yesterday’s “high definition” law has given way to a new “low definition” law. The main features of the latter have debased such paradigmatic concepts as the authority of the State legislator, the dichotomy between internal and external legal norms, the distinction between public and private sources of law, the image of the Kelsenian pyramid of norms, and the centrality of legal obligation. Legal pluralism and constitutionalism have frequently been presented as the two main competing orientations to meet the challenges of the global age. Whereas the former insists on diversity, the latter insists on common values. The legal, empirical, and doctrinal information gleaned from nine national reporters about the respective situations of Argentina, Botswana, Brazil, Cyprus, Germany, Greece, Singapore, the Solomon Islands, and the United Kingdom tend to prove that no clear-cut distinction between pluralism and constitutionalism is evident. Nor are the strategies these two perspectives embody totally successful to meet the demands of the day. Section 2 of this general report sets the stage for the study of legal interactions in the global age. It sheds light on the degree of pluralism each of the studied legal systems admits, both in its relations with other legal systems that reach beyond the States, and in its relations with more or less autonomous inner forms of legal normativity. Section 3 tackles the forms of interactions that take place among legal actors in the context of an increasingly plural landscape, and how they contribute to changing legal mentalities. By focusing respectively on legal actors’ reasoning and on legal scholarship, understood as the interacting members of a unified epistemic community, Sects. 4 and 5 contribute to highlighting what “thinking like a lawyer” means today. Finally, Sect. 6 identifies how little neutral, and how value-laden, the current discussion about pluralism and constitutionalism is. The very concepts that are currently used to confront today’s major legal changes testify to the ideological dimension of legal analysis.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren
Nächstes Kapitel A Particular Dialogue Between Systems. The Argentinian Case
Fußnoten
1
Grossi (2007), p. 8.
 
2
On this image, see Ferrarese (2012), p. 32. For a general presentation, see also Domingo (2008), Walker (2015), Frydman (2012, 2014) and Cotterrell (2006).
 
3
On the complexity and polycentricity of the common law, see esp. Samuel (2003, 2013).
 
4
Ferrarese (2012), pp. 52–53.
 
5
See also Yeh and Chang (2008), pp. 104–108.
 
6
Introducing further important conceptual discussions, see Kombos, Legal Pluralism and Constitutionalism in the Cypriot Example.
 
7
On the major trends in constitutionalism, see McIlwain (1940), Wormuth (1949), Fioravanti (1999, 2009), Grimm (1991, 2016), Mohnhaupt and Grimm (2002) and Bastid (1985).
 
8
5 US 137 (1803).
 
9
Article VI of the US Constitution. On constitutional supremacy, see esp. Del Rosario-Rodríguez (2011).
 
10
See e.g. Kelsen (1962) and Merkl (1962).
 
11
Henkin (1998), pp. 11–12.
 
12
See e.g. Wittgenstein (2010), p. 57; Wittgenstein (2014), pp. 64–65.
 
13
Kombos, Legal Pluralism and Constitutionalism in the Cypriot Example.
 
14
Helfer (2003), Kadelbach and Kleinlein (2006), St. John Macdonald and Johnston (2005), Frishman and Muller (2010), Schwöbel (2011) and Queiroz (2011).
 
15
Art. 53 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties of 1969. See e.g. Orakhelashvili (2010).
 
16
Tomuschat (1993) and Simma (1994).
 
17
Fassbender (2009), Dupuy (1997), Doyle (2009) and Chemain and Pellet (2006).
 
18
Schneiderman (2008), Cass (2005), Petersmann (2000, 2011), McGinnis and Movsesian (2000) and Trachtman (2006).
 
19
ECHR, 23 March 1995, Loizidou v. Turkey (Preliminary objections), (Application no. 15318/89), § 75. See e.g. Walter (1999), Alkema (2000) and Stone Sweet (2009).
 
20
ECJ, 23 April 1986, Parti écologiste “Les Verts” v. European Parliament, Case 294/83, § 23.
 
21
ECJ, 18 December 2014, Opinion 2/13.
 
22
Weiler (1999), Weiler and Wind (2003), Schütze (2012), Rosas and Armati (2012), Von Bogdandy and Bast (2010) and Bailleux (2014).
 
23
Alston (2005), Clapham (2006), Gatto (2011) and Palombella (2012).
 
24
Nolan (2009). See also the Norms on the Responsibilities of Transnational Corporations and Other Business Enterprises with regard to Human Rights of 2003, https://​digitallibrary.​un.​org/​record/​501576, and the United Nations Global Compact, https://​www.​unglobalcompact.​org/​. See e.g. Rasche (2010).
 
25
Teubner (2004, 2012, 2016).
 
26
Teubner (2010, 2013). On sectorial constitutionalisation, see also Tuori (2015), pp. 125–318.
 
27
See e.g. Zumbansen (2010, 2011), Hall and Biersteker (2011), Cutler (2003), Tuori (2013) and Maduro et al. (2014).
 
28
Scott et al. (2011), Schepel (2004, 2005) and Peters et al. (2009).
 
29
Muir Watt (2004), p. 274.
 
30
Teubner (2011). See also Robé (2012, 2013).
 
31
See e.g. Storini and Alenza García (2012) and Corrêa Souza de Oliveira and Luiz Streck (2014).
 
32
See esp. De Sousa Santos (2002).
 
33
See e.g. Neves (2009), pp. 216–229.
 
34
See e.g. Andrade et al. (2009), Ávila Santamaría et al. (2008) and López Freire et al. (2009).
 
35
See e.g. Acosta (2013), Pigrau Solé (2013) and Bagni (2013).
 
36
See also Yeh and Chang (2008).
 
37
See also Klabbers et al. (2009).
 
38
On pluralism, see among others, MacCormick (1995, 1999), Walker (2002, 2016), Teubner (1997) and Berman (2009).
 
39
Cover (1981).
 
40
Cruz Villalón (2004), p. 73.
 
41
Fischer-Lescano (2005), Schwöbel (2011), Lang and Wiener (2017) and Belov (2018).
 
42
Kjaer (2014).
 
43
Avbelj and Komárek (2008, 2012) and Millet (2018).
 
44
Stein (1981), Tsagourias (2007), Zumbansen (2012a, b), Goderis and Versteeg (2013) and Yeh and Chang (2008).
 
45
Pernice (1999, 2002), Freixes et al. (2012), Piattoni (2010), Walker (2012a), Cerri and Donnarumma (2014) and Navas Castillo and Florentina Navas Castillo (2016).
 
46
Neves (2009, 2015).
 
47
Shaw (2011), Krisch (2011) and Walker (2012b).
 
48
Teubner (2003).
 
49
Besselink (2006, 2007); Pernice and Mayer (2000); Claes and De Visser (2012), p. 144.
 
50
Bustos Gisbert (2005).
 
51
Gordillo Pérez (2014).
 
52
Jackson (2010), p. 91.
 
53
Letsas (2012).
 
54
Atienza (2013), pp. 31–60. See similarly Zumbansen (2012a, b).
 
55
De Julios-Campuzano (2009). For an overview of the current theoretical efforts, see Kombos, Legal Pluralism and Constitutionalism in the Cypriot Example, § 2.
 
56
Palandri (2013), pp. 61–62.
 
57
Palandri (2013), p. 67.
 
58
Griffiths (1986), pp. 38–39.
 
59
See esp. Petersen and Zahle (1995).
 
60
Tuori (2013). See also Tuori and Sankari (2010).
 
61
Kennedy (2008).
 
62
See e.g. Walker (2002, 2016); Cohen (2012), esp. pp. 21–79.
 
63
Palandri (2013), p. 68.
 
64
Walker (2016), pp. 333–334.
 
65
Bachelard (1967), p. 20. See Ost and Van de Kerchove (1988); Ponthoreau (2010), pp. 203–206.
 
66
Ross (1946).
 
67
Ross (2004), pp. 29–30.
 
68
Zucca (2018), p. 5.
 
69
Kletzer (2018), p. 96.
 
70
Delmas-Marty (2006).
 
71
Millet (2018), p. 128.
 
72
See e.g. Pegoraro and Figueroa Mejía (2017).
 
73
Schauer (2009).
 
74
Glenn (1987) and Flanders (2009). On the distinction between “must-”, “should-”, and “may-” sources of law, see also Peczenik (2009).
 
75
See esp. Ehrlich (1913) and Romano (2002).
 
76
Twining (2009).
 
77
For critical efforts at conceptual clarification, see for example Griffiths (1986), Merry (1988), Petersen and Zahle (1995), Tamanaha (1993, 2008), Teubner (1992, 1997) and Berman (2009).
 
78
Twining (2009), p. 28. See also Twining (2000), pp. 82–88, 224–233.
 
79
See e.g. Fombad (2012) and Killander (2017).
 
80
See generally Shelton (2011). See also Killander and Adjolohoun (2010) and Ramadi Dinokopila (2017).
 
81
Law relating to the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution, (Law No. 127(I)/2006).
 
82
Kombos, Legal Pluralism and Constitutionalism in the Cypriot Example, § 3.2.1.
 
83
Attorney General v. Costas Constantinou (2005) LCR 1356, quoted by Kombos, Legal Pluralism and Constitutionalism in the Cypriot Example, § 3.3.2.3.
 
84
Kombos, Legal Pluralism and Constitutionalism in the Cypriot Example, § 3.2.2.
 
85
Kombos, Legal Pluralism and Constitutionalism in the Cypriot Example, § 3.2.2.
 
86
Kombos, Legal Pluralism and Constitutionalism in the Cypriot Example, § 3.3.2.3.
 
87
Tassopoulos, Between Constitutionalism and Legal Pluralism: Perspectives from Greece, § 1.
 
88
See also infra, § 3.
 
89
STF, RE 349.703; STF, RE 466.343. See De Barcelos, Brazil and Its Many Realities. Courts and State-Centrism; Administrative Agencies and International Cooperation, § 2.
 
90
Ucín, A Particular Dialogue Between Systems. The Argentinian Case.
 
91
Ucín, A Particular Dialogue Between Systems. The Argentinian Case, § 1.ii.
 
92
Ucín, A Particular Dialogue Between Systems. The Argentinian Case, § 1.
 
93
Psygkas, Accommodating Legal Pluralism and ‘Pluralizing’ the Constitution: The Example of the United Kingdom, § 2.1.
 
94
R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union [2017] UKSC 5 [55], quoted by Psygkas, Accommodating Legal Pluralism and ‘Pluralizing’ the Constitution: The Example of the United Kingdom, § 2.1.
 
95
See ECJ, 5 February 1963, Van Gend & Loos (26/62); ECJ, 15 July 1964, Flaminio Costa v ENEL (6/64); ECJ, 17 December 1970, Internationale Handelsgesellschaft (11/70); ECJ, 9 March 1978, Simmenthal (106/77).
 
96
Psygkas, Accommodating Legal Pluralism and ‘Pluralizing’ the Constitution: The Example of the United Kingdom, § 2.3, alluding to Hart (2012).
 
97
Fombad, Reconciling Legal Pluralism and Constitutionalism: New Trajectories for Legal Theory in the Age of Globalisation in Botswana, § 2. See also Tshosa (2007).
 
98
Attornery-General v. Dow [1992] BLR 119, 154, quoted by Fombad, Reconciling Legal Pluralism and Constitutionalism: New Trajectories for Legal Theory in the Age of Globalisation in Botswana, § 2. See also Ramadi Dinokopila (2017), pp. 239–240.
 
99
Neo, Legal Pluralism in Centralist Singapore, § 2.
 
100
Public Prosecutor v Tan Cheng Yew [2013] 1 SLR 1095 at [56], quoted by Neo, Legal Pluralism in Centralist Singapore, § 2.
 
101
Neo, Legal Pluralism in Centralist Singapore, § 2. See also Neo (2012).
 
102
Yong Vui Kong v Public Prosecutor [2015] 2 SLR 1129, quoted by Neo, Legal Pluralism in Centralist Singapore, § 2.
 
103
Neo, Legal Pluralism in Centralist Singapore, § 2.
 
104
Corrin, Constitutionalism and Customary Law in Solomon Island, § 3.1.
 
105
Corrin, Constitutionalism and Customary Law in Solomon Island, § 4.1.
 
106
Quoted by Corrin, Constitutionalism and Customary Law in Solomon Island, § 4.3.
 
107
Corrin, Constitutionalism and Customary Law in Solomon Island, § 4.3.
 
108
Viellechner, ‘Friendliness’ Towards Others: How the German Constitution Deals with Legal Pluralism, § 2.2.1.
 
109
BVerfGE 58, 1, 34 (1981); BVerfGE 64, 1, 20 (1983), quoted by Viellechner, ‘Friendliness’ Towards Others: How the German Constitution Deals with Legal Pluralism, § 3.1.3.
 
110
BVerfGE 74, 358, 370 (1987); BVerfGE 128, 282, 306 (2011), quoted by Viellechner, ‘Friendliness’ Towards Others: How the German Constitution Deals with Legal Pluralism, § 3.1.3.
 
111
BVerfGE 111, 307, 315 (2004), quoted by Viellechner, ‘Friendliness’ Towards Others: How the German Constitution Deals with Legal Pluralism, § 3.1.3.
 
112
Viellechner, ‘Friendliness’ Towards Others: How the German Constitution Deals with Legal Pluralism, § 3.1.3.
 
113
See Cossalter and Klement (2016) and Cossalter et al. (2017).
 
114
Viellechner, ‘Friendliness’ Towards Others: How the German Constitution Deals with Legal Pluralism, § 2.2.2.
 
115
Viellechner, ‘Friendliness’ Towards Others: How the German Constitution Deals with Legal Pluralism, § 3.1.4.
 
116
Viellechner, ‘Friendliness’ Towards Others: How the German Constitution Deals with Legal Pluralism, §§ 3.1.6 and 3.2.3.
 
117
Fombad, Reconciling Legal Pluralism and Constitutionalism: New Trajectories for Legal Theory in the Age of Globalisation in Botswana, § 2.
 
118
De Barcelos, Brazil and Its Many Realities. Courts and State-Centrism; Administrative Agencies and International Cooperation, § 2.
 
119
Wright, quoted by Psygkas, Accommodating Legal Pluralism and ‘Pluralizing’ the Constitution: The Example of the United Kingdom, § 1.
 
120
Psygkas, Accommodating Legal Pluralism and ‘Pluralizing’ the Constitution: The Example of the United Kingdom, § 1.
 
121
Fombad, Reconciling Legal Pluralism and Constitutionalism: New Trajectories for Legal Theory in the Age of Globalisation in Botswana, § 1.
 
122
See for example Tetley (2000), Reid (2003), Du Plessis (2006), Palmer and Mattar (2015) and Palmer (2012).
 
123
Psygkas, Accommodating Legal Pluralism and ‘Pluralizing’ the Constitution: The Example of the United Kingdom, § 1.
 
124
Corrin, Constitutionalism and Customary Law in Solomon Island, § 1.
 
125
Corrin, Constitutionalism and Customary Law in Solomon Island, § 1.
 
126
Corrin, Constitutionalism and Customary Law in Solomon Island, § 1. See also ibid., § 7.
 
127
K v T [1985–1986] SILR 49, quoted by Corrin, Constitutionalism and Customary Law in Solomon Island, § 3.4.
 
128
Corrin, Constitutionalism and Customary Law in Solomon Island, § 3.4.
 
129
Kombos, Legal Pluralism and Constitutionalism in the Cypriot Example, § 3.1.
 
130
Kombos, Legal Pluralism and Constitutionalism in the Cypriot Example, § 3.2.4.
 
131
Tassopoulos, Between Constitutionalism and Legal Pluralism: Perspectives from Greece, § 5.
 
132
De Barcelos, Brazil and Its Many Realities. Courts and State-Centrism; Administrative Agencies and International Cooperation, § 1.
 
133
De Barcelos, Brazil and Its Many Realities. Courts and State-Centrism; Administrative Agencies and International Cooperation, § 2.
 
134
De Barcelos, Brazil and Its Many Realities. Courts and State-Centrism; Administrative Agencies and International Cooperation, § 2.
 
135
De Barcelos, Brazil and Its Many Realities. Courts and State-Centrism; Administrative Agencies and International Cooperation, § 2.
 
136
Ucín, A Particular Dialogue Between Systems. The Argentinian Case, § 1.iii.
 
137
Neo, Legal Pluralism in Centralist Singapore, § 1.
 
138
Neo, Legal Pluralism in Centralist Singapore, § 3.
 
139
Neo, Legal Pluralism in Centralist Singapore, § 3.
 
140
Shafeeg bin Salim Talib and another v Fatimah bte Abud bin Talib and others [2010] 2 SLR 1123, quoted by Neo, Legal Pluralism in Centralist Singapore, § 3.
 
141
Kombos, Legal Pluralism and Constitutionalism in the Cypriot Example, § 2.1.
 
142
See infra, §§ 4 and 5.
 
143
For illustrations, see e.g. Burgorgue-Larsen (2009); Ayala Corao (2012), pp. 128–129.
 
144
Scalia-Breyer Debate on Constitutional relevance of foreign court decisions, available at http://​www.​freerepublic.​com/​focus/​news/​1352357/​posts.
 
145
7 Coke Report 1a, 77 ER 377 (1608).
 
146
These remarks follow from a project developped with Horatia Muir Watt and Mikhaïl Xifaras, about “Emerging Global Legal Characters: Arbitrators, Judges and Transnational Legal Analysis”, presented at the Institute for Global Law and Public Policy Workshop of 2011.
 
147
See for example Supreme Court of the United States, Lawrence v. Texas 539 U.S. 558 (2003); Roper v. Simmons 543 U.S. 551 (2005); Constitutional Court of South Africa, State v T Makwanyane and M Mchunu, Case No. CCT/3/94; Supreme Court of Canada, R. v. Morgentaler, [1988] 1 S.C.R. 30. For a more critical account, see also infra, § 6.
 
148
Psygkas, Accommodating Legal Pluralism and ‘Pluralizing’ the Constitution: The Example of the United Kingdom, § 2.4.
 
149
De Barcelos, Brazil and Its Many Realities. Courts and State-Centrism; Administrative Agencies and International Cooperation, § 3.
 
150
De Barcelos, Brazil and Its Many Realities. Courts and State-Centrism; Administrative Agencies and International Cooperation, § 3.
 
151
Viellechner, ‘Friendliness’ Towards Others: How the German Constitution Deals with Legal Pluralism, § 2.3.1.
 
152
De Savigny (1855), pp. 206–208.
 
153
Viellechner, ‘Friendliness’ Towards Others: How the German Constitution Deals with Legal Pluralism, § 2.3.1.
 
154
Kombos, Legal Pluralism and Constitutionalism in the Cypriot Example, § 3.3.2.2.
 
155
Kombos, Legal Pluralism and Constitutionalism in the Cypriot Example, § 3.3.2.2.
 
156
Alpha Bank Cyprus v. Si Senh Dau and others, Joint Civil Appeals 23-29/2013, Decision of 13 September 2013, quoted by Kombos, Legal Pluralism and Constitutionalism in the Cypriot Example, § 3.3.2.1.
 
157
On the remaining limitations, see Kombos, Legal Pluralism and Constitutionalism in the Cypriot Example, § 3.4.1.
 
158
Council of State 3670/2006, quoted by Tassopoulos, Between Constitutionalism and Legal Pluralism: Perspectives from Greece, § 2.
 
159
VfGH, 10 March 1999, B 2251/97, B 2594/97.
 
160
Corte costituzionale, ord. 102/2008, 103/2008, 207/2013.
 
161
Decision n° 2013-314P QPC, 4 April 2013, M. Jeremy F. [Absence de recours en cas d’extension des effets du mandat d’arrêt européen - question préjudicielle à la Cour de justice de l’Union européenne]. See generally Drigo (2013).
 
162
BVerfG, 2 BvR 2728/13.
 
163
Tassopoulos, Between Constitutionalism and Legal Pluralism: Perspectives from Greece, § 2.
 
164
Cruz Villalón (2004), p. 73.
 
165
Tassopoulos, Between Constitutionalism and Legal Pluralism: Perspectives from Greece, § 2.
 
166
See infra, §§ 4 and 6.
 
167
See e.g. Dubout (2015).
 
168
Dubout and Touzé (2010).
 
169
Bernardi (2017).
 
170
See infra, § 4.
 
171
Tassopoulos, Between Constitutionalism and Legal Pluralism: Perspectives from Greece, § 3.
 
172
Tassopoulos, Between Constitutionalism and Legal Pluralism: Perspectives from Greece, § 2.
 
173
Tassopoulos, Between Constitutionalism and Legal Pluralism: Perspectives from Greece, § 4.
 
174
See infra, § 4.
 
175
Viellechner, ‘Friendliness’ Towards Others: How the German Constitution Deals with Legal Pluralism, § 1.
 
176
BVerfGE 37, 217 (1973); BVerfGE 73, 339 (1986); BVerfGE 102, 147 (2000), quoted by Viellechner, ‘Friendliness’ Towards Others: How the German Constitution Deals with Legal Pluralism, § 3.1.4.
 
177
French Conseil constitutionnel, Decision n° 2006-540 DC, 27 July 2006 Loi relative au droit d’auteur et aux droits voisins dans la société de l’information.
 
178
German Federal Constitutional Court, Judgment on Lisbon Treaty, June 30, 2009 (BVerfG, 2 BvE 2/08). On the doctrine of “constitutional identity”, see infra, §§ 4 and 6.
 
179
See e.g. Schmid (2001).
 
180
This case is also commented on by Kombos, Legal Pluralism and Constitutionalism in the Cypriot Example, § 2.4. For other examples of transconstitutional conflicts in Poland (where the Constitutional Tribunal was ready to ignore a EU Regulation if it had disregarded domestic fundamental rights (Polish Constitutional Tribunal, Decision SK 45/09), Venezuela (where the constitutional chamber of the Supreme Court decided by Expediente n° 11-1130 du 17 octobre 2011, not to abide by a ruling of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights), and Italy (where the Constitutional Court by Constitutional Court, sent. 238/2014, refused to abide by a ruling of the International Court of Justice), see Muir Watt and Tusseau (2016) and Tusseau (2012, 2013b, 2014a). See also Lavranos (2008).
 
181
ECJ, 22 June 2011, Marie Landtová c/ Česká správa socialního zabezpečení, C-399/09, §§ 44–46.
 
182
ECJ, 22 June 2011, Marie Landtová c/ Česká správa socialního zabezpečení, C-399/09, § 49.
 
183
Décisions Pl. ÚS 50/04, Pl. ÚS 66/04, Pl. ÚS 19/08, Pl. ÚS 29/09.
 
184
BVerfGE 89, 155 (1993).
 
185
Czech Constitutional Court, Pl. ÚS 5/12, § VII.
 
186
Czech Constitutional Court, Pl. ÚS 5/12, § VII.
 
187
Czech Constitutional Court, Pl. ÚS 5/12, § VII.
 
188
Czech Constitutional Court, Pl. ÚS 5/12, § VII.
 
189
BVerfGE 126, 284 (2010), quoted by Viellechner, ‘Friendliness’ Towards Others: How the German Constitution Deals with Legal Pluralism, § 3.1.4.
 
190
BVerfGE 134, 366 (2014), quoted by Viellechner, ‘Friendliness’ Towards Others: How the German Constitution Deals with Legal Pluralism, § 3.1.4. On this case, see e.g. Tusseau (2014b).
 
191
Ucín, A Particular Dialogue Between Systems. The Argentinian Case, § 3.
 
192
Ucín, A Particular Dialogue Between Systems. The Argentinian Case, § 3.
 
193
Manchester City Council v Pinnock [2010] UKSC 45 [48] (Lord Neuberger), quoted by Psygkas, Accommodating Legal Pluralism and ‘Pluralizing’ the Constitution: The Example of the United Kingdom, § 2.4.
 
194
Fombad, Reconciling Legal Pluralism and Constitutionalism: New Trajectories for Legal Theory in the Age of Globalisation in Botswana, § 4.
 
195
Corrin, Constitutionalism and Customary Law in Solomon Island, § 3.4.
 
196
Corrin, Constitutionalism and Customary Law in Solomon Island, § 4.1.
 
197
Corrin, Constitutionalism and Customary Law in Solomon Island, § 4.1.
 
198
Corrin, Constitutionalism and Customary Law in Solomon Island, § 4.2.3.
 
199
See also Corrin Care (1999).
 
200
Quoted by Corrin, Constitutionalism and Customary Law in Solomon Island, § 4.2.3.
 
201
See especially in this respect Muria CJ in Pusi v. Leni, quoted by Corrin, Constitutionalism and Customary Law in Solomon Island, § 6: “I have made these observations because it appears to the court that this case is a classic example of an attempt to use the Constitution to circumvent the lawful application of custom, a course of action that may well engender disharmony in society. Such a course must not be allowed to flourish in this country.”
 
202
Corrin, Constitutionalism and Customary Law in Solomon Island, § 4.3.
 
203
Corrin, Constitutionalism and Customary Law in Solomon Island, § 4.3.
 
204
Corrin, Constitutionalism and Customary Law in Solomon Island, § 4.3.
 
205
Neo, Legal Pluralism in Centralist Singapore, § 4.
 
206
Chan Hiang Leng Colin v Public Prosecutor [1994] 3 SLR(R) 209, quoted by Neo, Legal Pluralism in Centralist Singapore, § 4.
 
207
Government of the State of Kelantan v Government of the Federation of Malaya [1963] MLJ 355, quoted by Neo, Legal Pluralism in Centralist Singapore, § 4. See further Tan (2017).
 
208
See more precisely infra, § 6.
 
209
Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (AIR 1973 SC 1461).
 
210
Teo Soh Lung v Minister for Home Affairs & Ors. [1989] 2 MLJ 449 (High Court of Singapore), quoted by Neo, Legal Pluralism in Centralist Singapore, § 4.2.
 
211
Mohammad Fiazal bin Sabtu v Public Prosecutor [2012] 4 SLR 947; Yong Vui Kong v Public Prosecutor [2015] 2 SLR 1129, quoted by Neo, Legal Pluralism in Centralist Singapore, § 4.2.
 
212
De Barcelos, Brazil and Its Many Realities. Courts and State-Centrism; Administrative Agencies and International Cooperation, § 4.
 
213
On the opposition between these two types of reasoning, see Alexy (2003).
 
214
De Barcelos, Brazil and Its Many Realities. Courts and State-Centrism; Administrative Agencies and International Cooperation, § 4.
 
215
Psygkas, Accommodating Legal Pluralism and ‘Pluralizing’ the Constitution: The Example of the United Kingdom, § 3.1.
 
216
Psygkas, Accommodating Legal Pluralism and ‘Pluralizing’ the Constitution: The Example of the United Kingdom, § 3.1.
 
217
Psygkas, Accommodating Legal Pluralism and ‘Pluralizing’ the Constitution: The Example of the United Kingdom, § 3.1.
 
218
Kennedy v The Charity Commission [2014] UKSC 20 at [54], quoted by Psygkas, Accommodating Legal Pluralism and ‘Pluralizing’ the Constitution: The Example of the United Kingdom, § 3.1.
 
219
Viellechner, ‘Friendliness’ Towards Others: How the German Constitution Deals with Legal Pluralism, § 3.3.3.
 
220
For a discussion from the viewpoint of the language (keywords) that is used by transconstitutional actors, see Bobić (2017).
 
221
Brudner (2004).
 
222
Hennette-Vauchez and Sorel (2011).
 
223
Beatty (2004).
 
224
Dworkin (1978), p. 17.
 
225
Dworkin (1978), pp. 40–41.
 
226
Dworkin (1978), p. 66.
 
227
Alexy (2002), pp. 47–48.
 
228
Alexy (2003), pp. 436–437.
 
229
See supra, n° 40.
 
230
McMahon (2009).
 
231
See for example Rosenfeld and Sajó (2006).
 
232
BVerfGE 101, 361 (1999).
 
233
ECtHR, 24 June 2004, Von Hannover v Germany (59320/00), §§ 76–79.
 
234
See especially in this respect Kombos, Legal Pluralism and Constitutionalism in the Cypriot Example, § 3.4.1.
 
235
See e.g. Barak (2012) and Bernal Pulido (2007).
 
236
ECJ, 17 December 1970, Internationale Handelsgesellschaft mbH v Einfuhr- und Vorratsstelle für Getreide und Futtermittel, 11-70, §§ 3–4.
 
237
ECJ, 9 March 1978, Amministrazione delle Finanze dello Stato v Simmenthal SpA, 106/77, § 21.
 
238
BVerfGE 37, 271 (1974).
 
239
See esp. ECJ, 14 May 1974, Nold, 4-73.
 
240
BVerfGE 73, 339 (1986).
 
241
See e.g. Lavranos (2008).
 
242
Conseil d’Etat, 8 February 2007, Arcelor (287110).
 
243
Halberstam (2009), pp. 352–353.
 
244
See ECtHR, 30 June 2005, Bosphorus Hava Yollari Turizm ve Ticaret Anonim şirketi v Ireland (45036/98) concerning the respect of ECHR standards by EC law.
 
245
ECJ, 3 September 2008, Yassin Abdullah Kadi and Al Barakaat International Foundation v Council of the European Union and Commission of the European Communities (C-402/05 P and C-415/05 P).
 
246
Ibid. § 288.
 
247
Ibid. §§ 318–328, 365–371.
 
248
See Opinion of Advocate General M Poiares Maduro §§ 54–55.
 
249
Sabel and Gerstenberg (2010), pp. 512–513.
 
250
See infra, § 6.
 
251
See infra, § 6.1.
 
252
Cohen (2010), p. 30. See also Cohen (2012).
 
253
Tusseau G, “On a Constitutional ‘Identity Movement’ in Global Constitutionalism”, Les matinées constitutionnelles du Regroupement stratégique Droit et Changement, McGill University, Montreal, May 6th, 2011; Marti (2011), Derosier (2015), Burgorgue-Larsen (2011), Millet (2013) and Saiz Arnaiz and Alcoberro Llivina (2013).
 
254
BVerfG, 2 BvE 2/08, from which an immense literature has resulted. See for example Fischer-Lescano et al. (2010), Grimm (2009), Schorkopf (2009), von Bogdandy (2010), Terhechte (2009), Schönberger (2009) and Reestman (2009).
 
255
See supra, n° 44.
 
256
“Amendments to this Basic Law affecting the division of the Federation into Länder, their participation on principle in the legislative process, or the principles laid down in Articles 1 and 20 shall be inadmissible.”
 
257
Lissabon Urteil, §§ 217–219, 240–241.
 
258
Tribunal constitucional, DTC 1/2004, Fundamento jurídico 2.
 
259
Constitutional Tribunal, K 18/04; K 32/09.
 
260
See regarding European Union law: Corte costituzionale, sent. 183/1973; 170/1984; 232/1989, § 3.1. and very recently the “Tarrico Saga” (ord. 24/2017). Regarding the law of the United Nations, see sent. 238/2014.
 
261
Choudhry (2006).
 
262
See especially infra, § 6.
 
263
De Barcelos, Brazil and Its Many Realities. Courts and State-Centrism; Administrative Agencies and International Cooperation, § 1.
 
264
De Barcelos, Brazil and Its Many Realities. Courts and State-Centrism; Administrative Agencies and International Cooperation, § 1.
 
265
Corrin, Constitutionalism and Customary Law in Solomon Island, § 6.
 
266
Corrin, Constitutionalism and Customary Law in Solomon Island, § 6.
 
267
Kombos, Legal Pluralism and Constitutionalism in the Cypriot Example, § 3.4.2.
 
268
Corrin, Constitutionalism and Customary Law in Solomon Island, § 7.
 
269
Fombad, Reconciling Legal Pluralism and Constitutionalism: New Trajectories for Legal Theory in the Age of Globalisation in Botswana, § 5.
 
270
Fombad, Reconciling Legal Pluralism and Constitutionalism: New Trajectories for Legal Theory in the Age of Globalisation in Botswana, § 6.
 
271
Fombad, Reconciling Legal Pluralism and Constitutionalism: New Trajectories for Legal Theory in the Age of Globalisation in Botswana, § 3.
 
272
Fombad, Reconciling Legal Pluralism and Constitutionalism: New Trajectories for Legal Theory in the Age of Globalisation in Botswana, §§ 5–6.
 
273
Fombad, Reconciling Legal Pluralism and Constitutionalism: New Trajectories for Legal Theory in the Age of Globalisation in Botswana, § 6.
 
274
Kammen (2006).
 
275
See infra, § 6.
 
276
See supra, § 4.
 
277
Viellechner, ‘Friendliness’ Towards Others: How the German Constitution Deals with Legal Pluralism, § 3.3.1.
 
278
Viellechner, ‘Friendliness’ Towards Others: How the German Constitution Deals with Legal Pluralism, § 3.3.1.
 
279
Viellechner, ‘Friendliness’ Towards Others: How the German Constitution Deals with Legal Pluralism, § 3.3.1.
 
280
See e.g. Goldman (1964) and Toth (2017).
 
281
See e.g. Latty (2007), Siekmann and Soek (2012) and Leroy and Yboud (2017).
 
282
Viellechner, ‘Friendliness’ Towards Others: How the German Constitution Deals with Legal Pluralism, § 3.3.1.
 
283
Viellechner, ‘Friendliness’ Towards Others: How the German Constitution Deals with Legal Pluralism, § 3.3.3. See also Viellechner (2015).
 
284
Kombos, Legal Pluralism and Constitutionalism in the Cypriot Example, § 2.2.
 
285
Kombos, Legal Pluralism and Constitutionalism in the Cypriot Example, § 2.2.
 
286
Viellechner, ‘Friendliness’ Towards Others: How the German Constitution Deals with Legal Pluralism, § 3.3.2.
 
287
See esp. Kammerhofer (2010) and Loughlin (2014).
 
288
Loughlin (2014).
 
289
Kombos, Legal Pluralism and Constitutionalism in the Cypriot Example, Introduction.
 
290
See e.g. Muir Watt and Tusseau (2016).
 
291
For a taxonomy of dialogues, see Poli (2016).
 
292
Kumm (2010), p. 203. See also Kumm (1999).
 
293
MacCormick (1995).
 
294
See e.g. Rijpkema (2013).
 
295
For a general overview of the use of the metaphore of dialogue in the literature, see Bateup (2006) and Rosas (2007). On this metaphor and its numerous illustrations see e.g. Fisher (1988), Hogg and Bushell (1997), Manfredi and Kelly (1999), Hogg and Thornton (1999), Hogg et al. (2007), Roach (2001a, b, 2004), Waldron (2004), Tremblay (2005), Petter (2003), Bernatchez and Russell (2008), Nogueira Alcalá (2012, 2013), Burgorgue-Larsen (2013), Friedman (1993), Webber (2002), AA VV (2009), Lichère et al. (2004), Meuwese and Snel (2013), Asociación de letrados del Tribunal constitucional (2013), Brandão (2011), Córdova Vinueza (2016), Fontanelli et al. (2010), Kenney et al. (1999) and Claes et al. (2012).
 
296
Weiler (2001), p. 10.
 
297
Neves (2009), p. 166.
 
298
See e.g. Choudhry (2006) and Le Quinio (2011).
 
299
McCrudden (2000) and Weiler (2000).
 
300
Neves (2009), p. 118.
 
301
Viellechner (2015), pp. 322–323.
 
302
Yeh and Chang (2008), p. 95.
 
303
Diálogo jurisprudencial. Derecho internacional de los derechos humanos. Tribunales nacionales. Corte interamericana de derechos humanos.
 
304
De Visser (2014), p. 329.
 
305
See esp. Fontanelli and Martinico (2008) and Martinico (2010).
 
306
Escobar-García (2012), pp. 84–85.
 
307
Criticizing the “dialogical literature” from a metalinguistic viewpoint, see Bateup (2006) and Meuwese and Snel (2013).
 
308
Simon and Rigaux (2010).
 
309
Paterson, quoted by Psygkas, Accommodating Legal Pluralism and ‘Pluralizing’ the Constitution: The Example of the United Kingdom, § 2.4. See also Law and Chang (2001).
 
310
See Tushnet (2005).
 
311
See e.g. Gibbs (2018).
 
312
See e.g. De Visser (2014), pp. 330–331; Meuwese and Snel (2013).
 
313
See e.g. Tayyab Mahmud (1994). See also Siems (2018).
 
314
See Tusseau (2013a).
 
315
See supra, § 4.
 
316
Supreme Court of Venezuela, Constitutional Chamber, 17 October 2011, Expediente n° 11-1130.
 
317
Corte costituzionale, sent 238/2014; ord. 24/2017.
 
318
On this theory, see esp. Bierling (1894). For a discussion, see Bahlmann (1995) and Yoon (2009).
 
319
See supra, § 4.
 
320
Troper (1988) and Tusseau (2008).
 
321
On this character, see Dworkin (1978).
 
322
See Holmes J., dissent in Lochner v. People of State of New York 198 U.S. 45, 76 (1905).
 
323
See supra, §§ 3 and 4.
 
324
Italics supplied.
 
325
ECJ, 14 October 2004, Omega Spielhallen- und Automatenaufstellungs-GmbH v Oberbürgermeisterin der Bundesstadt Bonn (C-36/02).
 
326
See Opinions of Advocate General Cruz Villalón in Case C-62/14 and of Advocate General Yves Bot in Case C-42/17.
 
327
ECJ, 12 June 12 2003, Case C-112/00, Eugen Schmidberger, Internationale Transporte und Planzüge and Republik Österreich.
 
328
ECJ, 22 December 2010, C-208/09, Ilonka Sayn-Wittgenstein. See also the Runević-Vardyn case, C-391/09 (2011) regarding the protection of national language as an element of constitutional identity that can limit freedom of movement, provided it respects a standard of proportionality.
 
329
See Ritleng (2010).
 
330
Constitutional Tribunal, DTC 1/2004.
 
331
Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala AIR 1973 SC 1461.
 
332
Weiler (2005).
 
333
Nuñez Poblete (2008).
 
334
For doubts as to the achievements of human rights protection by the ECJ, see Albi (2010).
 
335
See supra, § 4.
 
336
ECJ, 14 May 1974, J. Nold, Kohlen- und Baustoffgroßhandlung v Commission of the European Communities, Case 4-73.
 
337
Poiares Maduro (2004), p. 16. See also Poiares Maduro (2012).
 
338
Italics supplied.
 
339
Italics supplied.
 
340
See e.g. the insistence of the German Constitutional Court in the Lisbon ruling, §§ 57, 153, 234, 304, 339.
 
341
See supra, § 4.
 
342
BVerfG, 2 BvE 2/08 of 30th June 2009, § 240.
 
343
JHR and LB (2007), p. 180.
 
344
Simon (2011), p. 41.
 
345
See e.g. Stout and Love (2016), Gill (2008) and Diggelmann and Altwicker (2008).
 
346
See e.g. Wahl (2010) and Tzanakopoulou (2018).
 
347
Deplano (2013).
 
348
Viellechner, ‘Friendliness’ Towards Others: How the German Constitution Deals with Legal Pluralism, § 3.3. See also Viellechner (2012) and Millet (2018).
 
349
Frank (1949, 1950).
 
350
International Law Commission, Report on the Fragmentation of International Law: Difficulties Arising from the Diversification and Expansion of International Law, UN Doc. A/CN/4/L.682, 13 avril 2006. See also Dupuy (2007) and Fischer-Lescano and Teubner (2013).
 
351
Peters (2006).
 
352
Koskenniemi (2005), p. 3.
 
353
Viellechner, ‘Friendliness’ Towards Others: How the German Constitution Deals with Legal Pluralism, § 3.3.2. See also Viellechner (2012).
 
354
Unger (1996).
 
355
More precisely, regarding the use of the concept of “federalism” in the analysis of the relations between member states and the EU, see Tusseau (2014c).
 
356
Arato and Cohen (2018), p. 25.
 
357
Neves (2009), p. 5.
 
358
Sartori (1962), p. 855.
 
359
Kuo (2010). See also Holmes (1995), pp. 161–166.
 
360
García de Enterría (2006), p. 55.
 
361
Kammerhofer (2010), p. 724.
 
362
See esp. Scheiderman (2013).
 
363
Kennedy (2008).
 
364
Dunoff (2009), p. 179.
 
365
Ward (2001), p. 29 and Sinclair (2012), pp. 1–8, 29.
 
366
Bellamy (2007) and McGann (2004).
 
367
Bellamy (2007), p. 178.
 
368
Bellamy (2007), pp. 145–175.
 
369
Parker (1994), pp. 66, 76, 98, 105, 107.
 
370
Chimni (2004).
 
371
Yasuaki (2006).
 
372
Sosa (2004).
 
373
Gill (2000).
 
374
Yeh and Chang (2008).
 
375
Lassalle (1862).
 
376
Peters (2009a).
 
377
Peters (2009b).
 
378
Gadamer (2011).
 
379
See also Skinner (1969), esp. p. 6; Dunn (1968).
 
380
Rorty (1980), pp. 348–349.
 
381
Tusseau (forthcoming).
 
382
See e.g. Legrand (2011); Legrand (2009), pp. 209–244; Legrand (1999, 2003, 2013, 2014).
 
383
Legrand (1999), p. 1058.
 
384
On this concept, see Sacco (1991), esp. pp. 105–108.
 
385
Frankenberg (1985), p. 425. See also Frankenberg (2016).
 
386
Balkin (1993–1994), p. 166.
 
387
Samuel (1988), p. 827.
 
388
Samuel (1988), p. 833.
 
389
Ewald (1995), p. 2114.
 
390
Geertz (1993), p. 149.
 
Literatur
AA VV (2009) Le dialogue des juges. Mélanges en l’honneur du président Bruno Genevois. Dalloz, Paris
Acosta A (2013) El Buen Vivir. Sumak Kawsay, una oportunidad para imaginar otros mundos, Icaria, Barcelona
Albi A (2010) From the Banana saga to a sugar saga and beyond: could the post-communist constitutional courts teach the EU a lesson in the rule of law? Common Mark Law Rev 47:791–829
Alexy R (2002) A theory of constitutional rights. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Alexy R (2003) Constitutional rights, balancing, and rationality. Ratio Juris 16(2):131–140
Alkema E (2000) The European Convention as a constitution and its court as a constitutional court. In: Mahoney P et al (eds) Protecting human rights. The European perspective. Studies in memory of Rolv Ryssdal. Carl Heymans Verlag, Köln, p 41
Alston P (ed) (2005) Non state actors and human rights. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Andrade S, Grijalva A, Storini C (eds) (2009) La nueva Constitución de Ecuador. Corporación Editora Nacional, Quito
Arato A, Cohen JL (2018) Introduction. Forms of pluralism and democratic constitutionalism. In: Arato A, Cohen JL, Von Busekist A (eds) Forms of pluralism and democratic constitutionalism. Columbia University Press, New York, pp 1–30
Asociación de letrados del Tribunal constitucional (2013) Tribunal constitucional y diálogo entre tribunales. Tribunal constitucional, Madrid
Atienza M (2013) Podemos hacer más. Otra forma de pensar el derecho. Pasos perdidos, Madrid
Avbelj M, Komárek J (2008) Four visions of constitutional pluralism. Eur Constit Law Rev 4:524–527
Avbelj M, Komárek J (eds) (2012) Constitutional pluralism in Europe and beyond. Hart, Oxford
Ávila Santamaría R, Grijalva Jiménez A, Martínez Dalmau R (eds) (2008) Desafíos constitucionales. La Constitución ecuatoriana del 2008 en perspectiva. Ministerio de Justicia y Derechos Humanos Tribunal Constitucional del Ecuador, Quito
Ayala Corao C (2012) El diálogo jurisprudencial entre los tribunales internacionales de derechos humanos y los tribunales constitucionales. In: Barrios González B (ed) Temas de dercho procesal constitucional. Universal Books, Panamá, pp 127–185
Bachelard G (1967) La formation de l’esprit scientifique. Contribution à une psychanalyse de la connaissance objective. Vrin, Paris
Bagni S (ed) (2013) Dallo Stato del bienestar allo Stato del buen vivir. Innovazione e tradizione nel costituzionalismo latino-americano. Filodiritto, Bologna
Bahlmann C (1995) Die Rechtslehre Ernst Rudolf Bierlings unter besonderer Berücksichtigung seiner Anerkennungstheorie. Münster (Westfalen), Univ., Diss
Bailleux J (2014) Penser l’Europe par le droit. L’invention du droit communautaire en France. Dalloz, Paris
Balkin JM (1993–1994) Understanding legal understanding: the legal subject and the problem of legal coherence. Yale Law J 103:105–176
Barak A (2012) Proportionality. Constitutional rights and their limitations. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Bastid P (1985) L’idée de constitution, [1962–1963]. Economica, Paris
Bateup C (2006) The dialogic promise: assessing the normative potential of theories of constitutional dialogue. Brooklyn Law Rev 71:1109–1180
Beatty DM (2004) The ultimate rule of law. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Bellamy R (2007) Political constitutionalism. A republican defence of the constitutionality of democracy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Belov M (ed) (2018) Global constitutionalism and its challenges to Westphalian constitutional law. Hart, Oxford
Berman PS (2009) The new legal pluralism. Annu Rev Law Soc Sci 5:225–242
Bernal Pulido C (2007) El principio de proporcionalidad y los derechos fundamentales. El principio de proporcionalidad como criterio para determinar el contenido de los derechos fundamentales vinculante para el legislador. Centro de estudios políticos y constitucionales, Madrid
Bernardi A (ed) (2017) I controlimiti. Primato delle norme europee e difesa dei principi costituzionali. Jovene, Napoli
Besselink LFM (2006) National parliaments in the EU’s composite constitution: a plea for a shift in paradigm. In: Kiiver P (ed) National and regional parliaments in the European constitutional order. Europa Law Publishing, Groningen, pp 117–131
Besselink LFM (2007) A composite European constitution. Kluwer, Groningen
Bierling ER (1894) Juristische Prinzipienlehre. JCB Mohr (Paul Siebeck), Freiburg i. B., Leipzig
Bobić A (2017) Constitutional pluralism is not dead: an analysis of interactions between constitutional courts of Member States and the European Court of Justice. German Law J 18(6):1395–1428
Brandão R (2011) Supremacia judicial versus diálogos institucionais. Lumen Juris, Rio de Janeiro
Brudner A (2004) Constitutional goods. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Burgorgue-Larsen L (2009) De l’internationalisation du dialogue des juges. Missive doctrinale à l’attention de Bruno Genevois. In: Le dialogue des juges. Mélanges en l’honneur du président Bruno Genevois. Dalloz, Paris, pp 95–130
Burgorgue-Larsen L (ed) (2011) L’identité constitutionnelle saisie par les juges en Europe. A. Pedone, Paris
Burgorgue-Larsen L (2013) El diálogo judicial. Máximo desafío de los tiempos jurídicos modernos. Porrúa, México
Bustos Gisbert R (2005) La constitución red. Un estudio sobre supraestatalidad y constitución. Instituto Vasco de Administración Pública, Oñati
Cass DZ (2005) The constitutionalization of the World Trade Organization. Legitimacy, democracy and community in the international trading system. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Cerri A, Donnarumma MR (eds) (2014) Il costituzionalismo multilivello: profili sostanziali e processuali / Le constitutionnalisme à plusieurs niveaux : aspects de fond et de procedure. Atti del Convegno di Studi tenutosi all’Università di Napoli “Federico II” il 25 e 26 maggio 2010, sotto l’Alto Patronato del Presidente della Repubblica italiana e con il patrocinio della Repubblica francese. Aracne, Roma
Chemain R, Pellet A (eds) (2006) La Charte des Nations Unies, constitution mondiale ? Pedone, Paris
Chimni BS (2004) International institutions today: an imperial global state in the making. Eur J Int Law 15:1–37
Choudhry S (ed) (2006) The migration of constitutional ideas. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Claes M, De Visser M (2012) Reflections on comparative method in European constitutional law. In: Adams M, Bomhoff J (eds) Practice and theory in comparative law. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 143–169
Claes M, De Visser M, Popelier P, Van de Heyning C (eds) (2012) Constitutional conversations in Europe. Actors, topics and procedures. Intersentia, Cambridge
Clapham A (2006) Human rights obligations of non state actors. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Cohen JL (2012) Globalization and sovereignty. Rethinking legality, legitimacy and constitutionalism. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Córdova Vinueza P (2016) Constitucionalismo dialógico y última palabra. Un agenda de políticas deliberativas para las cortes constitucionales. Anuario de derecho constitucional latinoamericano:253–270
Corrêa Souza de Oliveira F, Luiz Streck L (2014) El nuevo constitucionalismo latinoamericano: reflexiones sobre la posibilidad de construir un derecho constitucional común. Anuario iberoamericano de justicia constitucional 18:125–153
Corrin Care J (1999) Customary law and human rights in Solomon Islands. J Leg Pluralism Unoff Law 43:135–144
Cossalter P, Klement JH (2016) La place du droit international public dans l’ordre juridique allemande. In: Bonnet B (ed) Traité des rapports entre ordres juridiques. LGDJ, Paris, pp 1596–1629
Cossalter P, Giegrich T, Schlegel AE (2017) La Cour constitutionnelle allemande et les relatiosn entre ordre juridique national et ordre juridique international. Revue française de droit administratif:799–817
Cotterrell R (2006) Law, culture and society. Legal ideas in the mirror of social theory. Ashgate, Aldershot
Cover RM (1981) The uses of jurisdictional redundancy: interest, ideology, and innovation. William Mary Law Rev 22:639–682
Cruz Villalón P (2004) La constitucion inedita. Estudios ante la constitucionalización de Europa. Trotta, Madrid
Cutler AC (2003) Private power and global authority. Transnational merchant law in the global economy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
De Julios-Campuzano A (2009) La transición paradigmática de la teoría jurídica. El derecho ante la globalización. Dykinson, Madrid
De Savigny FC (1855) Traité de droit romain, vol 1. Firmin Didot, Paris
De Sousa Santos B (2002) Toward a new legal common sense. Law, globalization, and emancipation. Butterworths, LexisNexis, London
De Visser M (2014) Constitutional review in Europe. A comparative analysis. Hart, Oxford, xliii+484 p, p 329
Del Rosario-Rodríguez MF (2011) La supremacía constitucional: naturaleza y alcances. Díkaion 20(1):97–117
Delmas-Marty M (2006) Le pluralisme ordonné. Editions du Seuil, Paris
Deplano R (2013) Fragmentation and constitutionalisation of international law: a theoretical inquiry. Eur J Leg Stud 6(1):67–89
Derosier J-P (2015) Les limites constitutionnelles à l’intégration européenne. Etude comparée: Allemagne, France, Italie. Lextenso, Issy-les-Moulineaux
Diggelmann O, Altwicker T (2008) Is there something like a constitution of international law? A critical analysis of the debate on world constitutionalism. Zeitschrift für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht 68:623–650
Domingo R (2008) ¿Qué es el derecho global?, 2nd edn. Thomson, Aranzadi, Cizur Menor
Doyle MW (2009) The UN Charter – a global constitution? In: Dunoff JL, Trachtman JP (eds) Ruling the world. Constitutionalism, international law, and global governance. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 113–132
Drigo C (2013) Preliminary reference to the European court of justice and multilevel protection of human rights: the complex dialogue between the European court of justice and constitutional courts. Turk Yearb Int Rel 43:1–49
Du Plessis J (2006) Comparative law and the study of mixed legal systems. In: Reimann M, Zimmermann R (eds) The Oxford handbook of comparative law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 477–512
Dubout E (2015) Droits fondamentaux et pluralisme constitutionnel dans l’Union européenne. In: Tinière R, Vial C (eds) La protection des droits fondamentaux dans l’Union européenne. Entre évolution et permanence. Bruylant, Bruxelles, pp 107–159
Dubout E, Touzé S (eds) (2010) Les droits fondamentaux : charnières entre ordres et systèmes juridiques. A. Pedone, Paris
Dunn J (1968) The identity of the history of ideas. Philosophy 43:85–104
Dunoff JL (2009) The politics of international constitutions: the curious case of the World Trade Organization. In: Dunoff JL, Trachtman JP (eds) Ruling the world. Constitutionalism, international law, and global governance. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 178–205
Dupuy P-M (1997) The constitutional dimension of the Charter of the United Nations revisited. Max Planck Yearb U N Law 1:1–33
Dupuy P-M (2007) A doctrinal debate in the globalisation era: on the “fragmentation” of international law. Eur J Leg Stud:1–19
Dworkin R (1978) Taking rights seriously. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Ehrlich E (1913) Grundlegung der Soziologie des Rechts. Duncker & Humblot, Berlin
Escobar-García C (2012) ¿Constitucionalismo global? Vicisitudes y contingencias del proceso a partir de algunas experiencias en América Latina. Díkaion 21(1):79–118
Ewald W (1995) Comparative jurisprudence (I): what was it like to try a rat? Univ Pa Law Rev 143:1889–2149
Fassbender B (2009) The United Nations Charter as the constitution of the international community. Nijhoff, Leiden
Ferrarese MR (2012) Prima lezione di diritto globale. Laterza, Roma
Fioravanti M (1999) Costituzione. Il Mulino, Bologna
Fioravanti M (2009) Costituzionalismo. Percorsi della storia e tendenze attuali. Laterza, Roma
Fischer-Lescano A (2005) Globalverfassung. Die Geltungsbegründung der Menschenrechte. Velbrück Wissenschaft, Weilerswist
Fischer-Lescano A, Teubner G (2013) Collisions de régimes : la recherché vaine de l’unité juridique face à la framgmentation du droit mondial. Revue internationale de droit économique 27:187–228
Fisher L (1988) Constitutional dialogues. Interpretation as political process. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Flanders CW (2009) Toward a theory of persuasive authority. Oklahoma Law Rev 62:55–88
Fombad CM (2012) Internationalization of constitutional law and constitutionalism in Africa. Am J Comp Law 60:439–473
Fontanelli F, Martinico G (2008) Alla ricerca della coerenza: le tecniche del ‘dialogo nascosto’ fra i giudici nell’ordinamento costituzionale multi-livello. Rivista trimestrale di diritto pubblico:351–389
Fontanelli F, Martinico G, Carrozza P (eds) (2010) Shaping rule of law through dialogue. International and supranational experiences. Europa Law Publishing, Groningen
Frank J (1949) Law and the modern mind, 6th edn. Stevens & Sons, London
Frank J (1950) Courts on trial. Myth and reality in American justice. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Frankenberg G (1985) Critical comparisons: re-thinking comparative law. Harv Int Law J 26:411–455
Frankenberg G (2016) Comparative law as critique. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham
Freixes T, Remotti J-C, Marrani D, Bombin J, Vanin-Verna L (eds) (2012) La gouvernance multi-level : penser l’enchevêtrement. Editions Modulaires Européennes, Fernelmont
Friedman B (1993) Dialogue and judicial review. Mich Law Rev 91(4):577–682
Frishman M, Muller S (eds) (2010) The dynamics of constitutionalism in the age of globalisation. The Hague Academic Press, The Hague, xvii+205 p
Frydman B (2014) Petit manuel pratique de droit global. Académie royale de Belgique, Bruxelles
Gadamer HG (2011) Wahrheit und Methode, 2nd edn. Akademie Verl., Berlin
García de Enterría E (2006) La Constitución como norma y el Tribunal Constitucional, 4a edn. Thomson, Civitas, Madrid
Gatto A (2011) Multinational enterprises and human rights. Obligations under EU law and international law. E. Elgar, Cheltenham
Geertz C (1993) Local knowledge. Further essays in interpretative anthropology. Fontana Press, London
Gibbs A (2018) End of the conversation of recasting constitutional dialogue? Int J Semiotics Law 31:127–143
Gill S (2008) Power and resistance in the new world order, 2nd edn. Palgrave, MacMillan, Basingstoke
Glenn HP (1987) Persuasive authority. McGill Law J/Revue de droit de McGill 32:261–298
Goderis B, Versteeg M (2013) Transnational constitutionalism. In: Galligan D, Versteeg M (eds) The social and political foundations of constitutionalism. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 103–133
Goldman B (1964) Frontières du droit et “lex mercatoria”. Archives de philosophie du droit:177–192
Gordillo Pérez LI (2014) Hacia la consolidación de un constitucionalismo interordinamental. Anuario iberoamericano de justicia constitucional 18:275–328
Griffiths J (1986) What is legal pluralism? J Leg Pluralism Unoff Law 24:1–55
Grimm D (1991) Die Zukunft der Verfassung. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main
Grimm D (2009) Das Grundgesetz als Riegel vor einer Verstaatlichung der Europäischen Union. Der Staat 48:475–495
Grimm D (2016) Constitutionalism. Past, present, and future. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Grossi P (2007) Mitologie giuridiche della modernità, 3rd edn. Giuffrè, Milano
Halberstam D (2009) Constitutional heterarchy: the centrality of conflict in the European Union and the United States. In: Dunoff JL, Trachtman JP (eds) Ruling the world. Constitutionalism, international law, and global governance. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 326–355
Hall R, Biersteker T (eds) (2011) The emergence of private authority. Forms of private authority and their implications for international governance. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Hart HLA (2012) The concept of law, 3rd edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Helfer LR (2003) Constitutional analogies in the international legal system. Loyola Los Angeles Law Rev 37:193–237
Henkin L (1998) Elements of constitutionalism. International commission of jurists. Review 60:11–22
Hennette-Vauchez S, Sorel J-M (eds) (2011) Les droits de l’homme ont-ils constitutionnalisé le monde ? Bruylant, Bruxelles
Hogg PW, Bushell AA (1997) The charter dialogue between courts and legislatures (or perhaps the charter of rights isn’t a bad thing after all). Osgoode Hall Law J 35:75–124
Hogg PW, Thornton AA (1999) Reply to “six degrees of dialogue”. Osgoode Hall Law J 37:529–536
Hogg PW, Bushell Thornton AA, Wright WK (2007) Charter dialogue revisited – or “much ado about metaphors”. Osgoode Hall Law J 45:1–65
Holmes S (1995) Passions and constraint. On the theory of liberal democracy. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Jackson VC (2010) Constitutional engagement in a transnational era. Oxford University Press, Oxford
JHR, LB (2007) Editorial. Eur Constit Law Rev 3:177–181
Kadelbach S, Kleinlein T (2006) Überstaatliches Verfassungsrecht. Archiv der Völkerrechts 44:235–266
Kammen M (2006) A machine that would go of itself. The constitution in American culture. Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick
Kammerhofer J (2010) Constitutionalism and the myth of practical reason: Kelsenian responses to methodological problems. Leiden J Int Law 23(4):723–740
Kelsen H (1962) Théorie pure du droit, 2nd edn. Dalloz, Paris
Kennedy DW (2008) The mystery of global governance. Ohio Northern Univ Law Rev 34:827–860
Kenney SJ, Reisinger WM, Reitz JC (eds) (1999) Constitutional dialogues in comparative perspective. MacMillan, London
Killander M (2017) The effects of international law norms on constitutional adjudication in Africa. In: Fombad CM (ed) Constitutional adjudication in Africa. Oxford Univeristy Press, Oxford, pp 209–224
Killander M, Adjolohoun H (2010) International law and domestic human rights litigation in Africa: an introduction. In: Killander M (ed) International law and domestic human rights litigation in Africa. Pretoria University Law Press, Pretoria, pp 3–22
Kjaer PF (2014) Constitutionalism in the global realm. A sociological approach. Routledge, Milton Park, New York
Klabbers J, Peters A, Ulfstein G (2009) The constitutionalization of international law. Oxford Univesity Press, Oxford
Kletzer C (2018) The idea of a pure theory of law. Hart Publishing, Oxford
Krisch N (2011) Beyond constitutionalism. The pluralist structure of postnational law. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Kumm M (1999) Who is the final arbiter of constitutionality in Europe? Common Mark Law Rev 36:351–386
Kumm M (2010) The best of times and the worst of times. Between triumphalism and nostalgia. In: Dobner P, Loughlin M (eds) The twilight of constitutionalism? Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 201–219
Kuo M-S (2010) The end of constitutionalism as we know it? Boundaries and the state of global constitutional (dis)ordering. Transnatl Leg Theory 1:329–369
Lang AF, Wiener A (eds) (2017) Handbook on global constitutionalism. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham
Latty F (2007) La lex sportiva. Recherche sur le droit transnational. M. Nijhoff, Leiden, Boston
Lavranos N (2008) The Solange-method as a tool for regulating competing jurisdictions among international courts and tribunals. Loyola Los Angeles Int Comp Law Rev 30:275–334
Law D, Chang W-C (2001) The limits of global judicial dialogue. Wash Law Rev 86:523–577
Le Quinio A (2011) Recherche sur la circulation des solutions juridiques. Le recours au droit comparé par les juridictions constitutionnelles. Fondation Varenne, Clermont-Ferrand
Legrand P (1999) Sur l’analyse différentielle des juriscultures. Revue internationale de droit compare 51:1053–1071
Legrand P (2003) The same and the different. In: Legrand P, Munday R (eds) Comparative legal studies: traditions and transitions. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 240–331
Legrand P (2009) La comparaison des droits expliquée à mes étudiants. In: Legrand P (ed) Comparer les droits, résolument. PUF, Paris, pp 209–244
Legrand P (2011) Le droit comparé, 4th edn. PUF, Paris
Legrand P (2013) What can you say, words it is, nothing else going. Int J Semiotics Law 26(4):805–832
Legrand P (2014) Pour la relevance des droits étrangers. IRJS éd., Paris
Leroy C, Yboud L (eds) (2017) Le concept d’arbitrage. Regards croisés entre droit et sport. L’Harmattan, Paris
Letsas G (2012) Harmonic law. The case against pluralism. In: Dickson J, Eleftheriadis P (eds) Philosophical foundations of European Union law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 77–108
Lichère F, Potvin-Salis L, Ragnouard A (eds) (2004) Le dialogue entre les juges européens et nationaux : incantation ou réalité ? Bruylant, Nemesis, Bruxelles
López Freire E et al (2009) La constitución ciudadana. Doce visiones sobre un documento revolucionario. Taurus, Ecuador
Loughlin M (2014) Constitutional pluralism: an oxymoron? Global Constitutionalism 3(1):9–30
MacCormick N (1995) The Maastricht Urteil: sovereignty now. Eur Law J 1:259–266
MacCormick N (1999) Questioning sovereignty. Law, state and nation in the European Commonwealth. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Maduro M, Tuori K, Sankari S (eds) (2014) Transnational law. Rethinking European law and legal thinking. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Mahmud T (1994) Jurisprudence of Successful Treason: Coup d’Etat & Common Law. Cornell Int Law J 49:49–140
Manfredi CP, Kelly JB (1999) Six degrees of dialogue: a response to Hogg and Bushell. Osgoode Hall Law J 37:513–527
Martinico G (2010) Judging in the multilevel legal order: exploring the techniques of “hidden dialogue”. King’s Law J 21:257–281
McCrudden C (2000) A common law of human rights?: Transnational judicial conversations on constitutional rights. Oxford J Leg Stud 20:499–532
McGann AJ (2004) The tyranny of supermajority: how majority rule protects minorities. J Theor Polit 16:56–70
McGinnis JO, Movsesian ML (2000) The World Trade Constitution. Harv Law Rev 114:511–605
McIlwain CH (1940) Constitutionalism: ancient and modern. Cornell University Press, Ithaca
McMahon C (2009) Reasonable disagreement. A theory of political morality. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Merkl AJ (1962) Prolegomena einer Theorie des rechtlichen Stufenbaues, [1931]. In: Klecatsky H, Marcic R, Schambeck H (eds) Die Wiener rechtstheoretische Schule. Schriften von Hans Kelsen, Adolf Merkl, Alfred Verdross. Europa Verlag, Universitätsverlag Anton Pustet, Wien, Salzburg, Bd. 2, pp 1311–1361
Merry SE (1988) Legal pluralism. Law Soc Rev 22:869–896
Meuwese A, Snel M (2013) “Constitutional dialogue”: an overview. Utrecht Law Rev 9(2):123–140
Millet F-X (2013) L’Union européenne et l’identité constitutionnelle des Etats membres. LGDJ, Paris
Millet F-X (2018) Constitutional pluralism beyond monism and dualism. In: Davies G, Avbelj M (eds) Research handbook on legal pluralism and EU law. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 111–132
Mohnhaupt H, Grimm D (2002) Verfassung. Zur Geschichte des Begriffs von der Antike bis zur Gegenwart: zwei Studien, 2nd edn. Duncker & Humblot, Berlin
Muir Watt H (2004) New challenges in public and private international legal theory: can comparative scholarship help? In: Van Hoecke M (ed) Epistemology and methodology of comparative law. Hart, Oxford, pp 271–283
Muir Watt H, Tusseau G (2016) Repenser le dévoilement de l’idéologie juridique : une approche fictionnelle de la gouvernance globale. In: Bonnet B (ed) Traité des rapports entre ordres juridiques. LGDJ, Paris, pp 169–219
Navas Castillo A, Florentina Navas Castillo F (2016) El Estado constitucional multinivel. Dykinson, Madrid
Neo JL (2012) Incorporating human rights: mitigated dualism and interpretation in Malaysian courts. Asian Yearb Int Law 18:1–37
Neves M (2009) Transconstitucionalismo. W.M.F. Martins Fontes, São Paulo
Nogueira Alcala H (ed) (2012) El diálogo transjudicial de los tribunales constitucionales entre sí y con las cortes internacionales de derechos humanos. Librotecnia, Santiago
Nogueira Alcalá H (ed) (2013) Diálogo judicial multinivel y principios interpretativos favor persona y de proporcionalidad. Librotecnica, Santiago
Nolan J (2009) The nexus between human rights and business: defining the sphere of corporate responsibility. In: Ferrall J, Rubinstein K (eds) Sanctions, accountability and governance in a globalised world. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 223–224
Nuñez Poblete M (2008) Introducción al concepto de identidad constitucional y a su función frente al derecho supranacional e internacional de los derechos de la persona. Revista Ius et Praxis 14:331–372
Orakhelashvili A (2010) Peremptory norms as an aspect of constitutionalisation in the international legal system. In: Frishman M, Muller S (eds) The dynamics of constitutionalism in the age of globalisation. Hague Academic Press, The Hague, pp 153–180
Ost F, Van de Kerchove M (1988) De la “bipolarité des erreurs” ou de quelques paradigmes de la science du droit. Archives de philosophie du droit 33:177–206
Palandri L (2013) Theoretical reflections on legal pluralism and global constitutionalism: their possible reconciliation in an alternative model of plural constitutionalism. Acta Juridica Hungarica 54(1):58–72
Palmer VV (2012) Mixed jurisdictions worldwide. The third legal family, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Palmer VV, Mattar MY (eds) (2015) Mixed legal systems, east and west. Ashgate, Farnham
Palombella G (2012) È possibile una legalità globale? Il Rule of law e la governance del mondo. Il Mulino, Bologna
Parker RD (1994) “Here the People Rule”. A constitutional populist manifesto. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Peczenik A (2009) On law and reason. Springer, New York
Pegoraro L, Figueroa Mejía GA (eds) (2017) Profesores y jueces. Influjos de la doctrina en la jurisprudencia constitucional de Iberoamérica, Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación, México
Pernice I (1999) Multilevel constitutionalism and the Treaty of Amsterdam: European constitution-making revisited? Common Mark Law Rev 36:703–750
Pernice I (2002) Multilevel constitutionalism in the European Union. Eur Law Rev:511–529
Pernice I, Mayer F (2000) De la constitution composée de l’Europe. Revue trimestrielle de droit européen 36:623–647
Peters A (2006) Compensatory constitutionalism: the function and potential of fundamental international norms and structures. Leiden J Int Law 19:579–610
Peters A (2009a) The merits of global constitutionalism. Indiana J Global Leg Stud 16:397–411
Peters A (2009b) Conclusions. In: Klabbers J, Peters A, Ulfstein G (eds) The constitutionalization of international law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 342–352
Peters A, Koechlin L, Förster T, Fenner Zinkernagel G (eds) (2009) Non-state actors as standard setters. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Petersen H, Zahle H (1995) Legal polycentricity. Consequences of pluralism in law. Avebury, Aldershot
Petersmann EU (2000) The WTO constitution and human rights. J Int Econ Law 3:19–25
Petersmann EU (2011) Mutilevel trade governance in the WTO requires multilevel constitutionalism. In: Joerges C, Petersmann EU (eds) Constitutionalism, mutilevel trade governance and international economic law, 2nd edn. Hart, Oxford, pp 5–57
Petter A (2003) Twenty years of charter justification: from liberal legalism to dubious dialogue. Univ New Brunswick Law J 52:187–199
Piattoni S (2010) The theory of multi-level governance. Conceptual, empirical, and normative challenges. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Pigrau Solé A (eds) (2013) Pueblos indígenas, diversidad cultural y justicia ambiental. Un estudio de las nuevas constituciones de Ecuador y Bolivia. Tirant lo blanch, Valencia
Poiares Maduro M (2012) Three claims of constitutional pluralism. In: Avbelj M, Komárek J (eds) Constitutional pluralism in the European Union and beyond. Hart, Oxford, pp 67–84
Poli MD (2016) Der justizielle Pluralismus der Europäischen Verfassungsgemeinschaft : “Babylonische Gerichte” oder “Gerichte für Babylon” ? Der Staat 55:373–391
Ponthoreau M-C (2010) Droit(s) constitutionnel(s) comparé(s). Economica, Paris
Queiroz CMM (2011) Direito constitucional internacional. Coimbra editor, Coimbra
Ramadi Dinokopila B (2017) The impact of regional and sub-regional courts and tribunals on constitutional adjudication in Africa. In: Fombad CM (ed) Constitutional adjudication in Africa. Oxford Univeristy Press, Oxford, pp 225–243
Rasche A (ed) (2010) The United Nations global compact. Achievements, trends and challenges. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Reestman JH (2009) The Franco-German constitutional divide, reflections on national and constitutional identity. Eur Constit Law Rev 5:374–390
Reid KGC (2003) The idea of mixed legal systems. Tulane Law Rev 78:5–40
Rijpkema P (2013) The concept of a global rule of law. Transnatl Leg Theory 4(2):167–196
Ritleng S (2010) Le droit au respect de l’identité constitutionnelle nationale. In: Barbato JC, Mouton JD (eds) Vers la reconnaissance de droits fondamentaux aux Etats membres de l’UE? Réflexions à patir des notions d’identité et de solidarité. Bruylant, Bruxelles, pp 21–47
Roach K (2001a) Constitutional and common law dialogues between the Supreme Court and Canadian legislatures. Can Bar Rev 80:481–533
Roach K (2001b) The Supreme Court on trial. Judicial activism of democratic dialogue. Irwin Law, Toronto
Roach K (2004) Dialogic judicial review and its critics. Supreme Court Law Rev 23:49–104
Robé J-P (2012) L’entreprise et la constitutionnalisation du système-monde de pouvoir. In: Roger B (ed) L’entreprise, formes de la propriété et responsabilités sociales. Lethielleux, Collège des Bernardins, Paris, pp 273–344
Robé J-P (2013) Les multinationales, vecteur d’un nouveau constitutionnalisme. Archives de philosophie du droit 56:337–361
Romano S (2002) L’ordre juridique, 2nd edn. Dalloz, Paris
Rorty R (1980) Philosophy and the mirror of nature. Blackwell, Oxford
Rosas A (2007) The European Court of Justice in context: forms and patterns of judicial dialogue. Eur J Leg Stud 1(2):1–16
Rosas A, Armati L (2012) EU constitutional law. An introduction, 2nd edn. Hart, Oxford
Rosenfeld M, Sajó A (2006) Spreading the liberal constitutionalism: an inquiry into the fate of free speech rights in new democracies. In: Choudhry S (ed) The migration of constitutional ideas. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 142–177
Ross A (1946) Towards a realistic jurisprudence. A criticism of the dualism in law. E. Munksgaard, Copenhagen
Ross A (2004) Le problème des sources du droit à la lumière d’une théorie réaliste du droit [1934]. In: Ross A (ed) Introduction à l’empirisme juridique. Textes théoriques. LGDJ, Paris, pp 23–37
Sabel CF, Gerstenberg O (2010) Constitutionalising an overlapping consensus: the ECJ and the emergence of a co-ordinate constitutional order. Eur Law J 16:511–550
Sacco R (1991) La comparaison juridique au service de la connaissance du droit. Economica, Paris
Saiz Arnaiz A, Alcoberro Llivina C (eds) (2013) National constitutional identity and European integration. Intersentia, Cambridge
Samuel G (1988) Comparative law and jurisprudence. Int Comp Law Q 47:817–836
Samuel G (2003) Epistemology and method in law. Ashgate, Burlington
Samuel G (2013) A short introduction to the common law. E. Elgar, Cheltenham
Sartori G (1962) Constitutionalism: a preliminary discussion. Am Polit Sci Rev 56(4):853–864
Schauer F (2009) Thinking like a lawyer. A new introduction to legal reasoning. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Scheiderman D (2013) A new global constitutional order? In: Ginsburg T, Dixon R (eds) Comparative constitutional law. E. Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 189–207
Schepel H (2004) Constituting private governance regimes: standards bodies in American law. In: Joerges C, Sand I-J, Teubner G (eds) Transnational governance and constitutionalism. Hart, Oxford, pp 161–188
Schepel H (2005) The constitution of private governance. Product standards in the regulation of integrated markets. Hart, Oxford
Schmid CU (2001) All bark and no bite: notes on the federal constitutional court’s “Banana Decision”. Eur Law J 7:95–113
Schneiderman D (2008) Constitutionalizing economic globalization. Investment rules and democracy’s promise. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Schönberger C (2009) Lisbon in Karlsruhe: Maastricht’s epigones at sea. German Law J 10:1201–1218
Schorkopf F (2009) The European Union as an association of sovereign states: Karlsruhe’s ruling on the Treaty of Lisbon. German Law J 10:1219–1240
Schütze R (2012) European constitutional law. Cambridge University Press, New York
Schwöbel CEJ (2011) Global constitutionalism in international legal perspective. Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden
Scott C, Cafaggi F, Senden L (2011) The conceptual and constitutional challenge of transnational private regulation. J Law Soc 38(1):1–19
Shaw J (2011) Postnational constitutionalism in the European Union. J Eur Public Policy 6(4):579–597
Shelton D (ed) (2011) International law and domestic legal systems. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Siekmann RCR, Soek J (eds) (2012) Lex Sportiva. What is sports law? TMC Asser Press, The Hague, Springer, Berlin
Siems M (2018) Malicious legal transplants. Leg Stud 38:103–119
Simma B (1994) From bilateralism to community interest in international law. Recueil des cours de l’Académie de droit international 250:217–384
Simon D (2011) L’identité constitutionnelle dans la jurisprudence de l’Union européenne. In: Burgorgue-Larsen L (ed) L’identité constitutionnelle saisie par les juges en Europe. Pédone, Paris, pp 27–44
Sinclair TJ (2012) Global governance. Polity, Cambridge
Skinner Q (1969) Meaning and understanding in the history of ideas. Hist Theory 8:3–53
St. John Macdonald R, Johnston DM (eds) (2005) Towards world constitutionalism. Issues in the legal ordering of the world community. M. Nijhoff, Leiden
Stein E (1981) Lawyers, judges and the making of a transnational constitution. Am J Int Law 75:1–27
Stone Sweet A (2009) On the constitutionalisation of the convention: the European Court of Human Rights as a constitutional court. Revue trimestrielle des droits de l’homme 80:923–944
Storini C, Alenza García JF (eds) (2012) Materiales sobre neoconstitucionalismo y nuevo constitucionalismo latinoamericano, Thomson, Reuters, Aranzadi, Cizur Menor
Stout M, Love JM (2016) A radically democratic response to global governance. Dystopian Utopias. Routlege, London
Tamanaha BZ (1993) The folly of the ‘social scientific’ concept of legal pluralism. J Law Soc 20:192–217
Tamanaha BZ (2008) Understanding legal pluralism: past to present, local to glocal. Sydn Law Rev 30(3):375–411
Tan EKB (2017) Much ado about nothing? The enigma of engagement of foreign constitutional law in Singapore. In: Neo JL (ed) Constitutional interpretation in Singapore. Routledge, London
Terhechte JP (2009) Souveränität, Dynamik und Integration – making up the rules as we go along? – Anmerkungen zum Lissabon-Urteil des Bundesverfassungsgerichts. Europäische Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsrecht 20:724–731
Tetley W (2000) Mixed jurisdictions: Common Law v. Civil Law (codified and uncodified). La Law Rev 60:677–738
Teubner G (1992) The two faces of Janus: rethinking legal pluralism. Cardozo Law Rev 13:1443–1462
Teubner G (1997) “Global Bukowina”: legal pluralism in the world society. In: Teubner G (ed) Global law without a state. Dartmouth, Aldershot, pp 3–28
Teubner G (2003) Globale Zivilverfassungen: Alternativen zur staatszentrierten Verfassungstheorie. Zeitschrift für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht 63:1–28
Teubner G (2004) Societal constitutionalism: alternatives to state-centred constitutional theory? In: Joerges C, Sand I-J, Teubner G (eds) Transnational governance and constitutionalism. Hart, Oxford, pp 3–28
Teubner G (2012) Constitutional fragments. Societal constitutionalism and globalization. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Teubner G (2013) The project of constitutional sociology: irritating nation state constitutionalism. Transnatl Leg Theory 4(1):44–58
Tomuschat C (1993) Obligations arising for states without or against their will. Recueil des cours de l’Académie de droit international 241:195–374
Toth O (2017) The lex mercatoria in theory and practice. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Trachtman JP (2006) The constitution of the WTO. Eur J Int Law 17:623–646
Tremblay LB (2005) The legitimacy of judicial review: the limits of dialogue between courts and legislatures. Int J Constit Law 3:617–648
Troper M (1988) Judges taken too seriously: Professor Dworkin’s views on jurisprudence. Ratio Juris 1:162–175
Tsagourias N (ed) (2007) Transnational constitutionalism. International and European models. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Tshosa OB (2007) The status and role of international law in the national law of Botswana. In: Fombad CM (ed) Essays on the law of Botswana. Juta, Cape Town, pp 229–246
Tuori K (2013) Vers une théorie du droit transnational. Revue internationale de droit économique 27:9–36
Tuori K (2015) European constitutionalism. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Tuori K, Sankari S (eds) (2010) The many constitutions of Europe. Ashgate, Farnham, Burlington
Tushnet M (2005) Misleading metaphors in comparative constitutionalism: moments and enthusiasm. Int J Constit Law 3:262–268
Tusseau G (2008) Métathéorie de la notion de principe dans la théorie du droit contemporaine. Sur quelques écoles de définition des principes. In: Caudal S (ed) Les principes en droit. Economica, Paris, pp 75–112
Tusseau G (2012) Chronique de jurisprudence droit administratif et droit constitutionnel. Jurisprudence étrangère : Le financement politique vu de l’étranger (Cour constitutionnelle de Corée du Sud, Décisions n° 2009Hun-Ma170 du 25 mars 2010, 2008Hun-Ma491 du 27 mai 2010, 2008Hun-Ba89 du 28 décembre 2010, 2010Hun-Ma451 du 26 mai 2011) et Eligible… mais frappé par une incompatibilité en cas d’élection : le droit électoral aux prises avec le constitutionnalisme multiniveaux (Tribunal suprême de justice du Venezuela, Chambre constitutionnelle, Expediente n° 11-1130 du 17 octobre 2011). Revue française de droit administratif: 536–545
Tusseau G (2013a) A plea for a hint of empiricism in constitutional theory: a comment on Cesare Pinelli’s “Constitutional Reasoning and Political Deliberation”. German Law J 14(8):1183–1194
Tusseau G (2013b) Chronique de jurisprudence droit administratif et droit constitutionnel. Jurisprudence étrangère : Le constitutionnalisme européen aux prises avec la « désobéissance institutionnelle » des juges nationaux (Tribunal constitutionnel polonais, Décision SK 45/09 du 16 novembre 2011 ; Cour constitutionnelle tchèque, Décision Pl. ÚS 5/12 du 31 janvier 2012, Pensions slovaques). Revue française de droit administrative: 149–157
Tusseau G (2014a) “Irregulare aliquod et (tantum non) monstro simile” : remarques sur les heurs et malheurs des dialogues juridictionnels transconstitutionnels. In: Brunet P, Hasegawa K, Yamamoto H (eds) Rencontre franco-japonaise autour des transferts de concepts juridiques. Mare & Martin, Paris, pp 97–140
Tusseau G (2014b) Chronique de jurisprudence droit administratif et droit constitutionnel. Jurisprudence étrangère : La gouvernance économique et monétaire européenne au prisme du constitutionnalisme allemand. Cour constitutionnelle fédérale allemande, 14 janvier 2014, 2 BvR 2728/13, et 18 mars 2014, 2 BvR 1390/12, 2 BvR 1421/12, 2 BvR 1438/12, 2 BvR 1439/12, 2 BvR 1440/12, 2 BvR 1824/12, 2 BvE 6/12. Revue française de droit administratif: 602–614
Tusseau G (2014c) Theoretical deflation: the EU order of competences and power-conferring norms theory. In: Azoulai L (ed) The question of competence in the European Union. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 39–62
Tusseau G (forthcoming) Droit comparé et théorie générale du droit. Remarques sur quelques allers-retours aporétiques
Twining W (2000) Globalisation and legal theory. Cambridge University Press, London
Tzanakopoulou M (2018) Reclaiming constitutionalism. Democracy, power and the state. Hart, Oxford
Unger RM (1996) What should legal analysis become? Verso, London
Viellechner L (2012) Constitutionalism as a Cipher: on the convergence of constitutionalist and pluralist approaches to the globalization of law. Goettingen J Int Law 4:599–623
Viellechner L (2015) Responsive legal pluralism: the emergence of transnational conflicts of law. Transnatl Leg Theory 6(2):312–332
Von Bogdandy A (2010) Prinzipien der Rechtsfortbildung im europäischen Rechtsraum. Neue Juristische Wochenschrift 63:1–5
Von Bogdandy A, Bast J (eds) (2010) Principles of European constitutional law, 2nd edn. Hart, Oxford, C.H. Beck, München
Wahl R (2010) In defence of “constitution”. In: Dobner P, Loughlin M (eds) The twilight of constitutionalism? Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 220–242
Waldron J (2004) Some models of dialogue between judges and legislators. In: Huscroft G, Broadie I (eds) Constitutionalism in the charter era. Butterwroths, Markham, pp 7–47
Walker N (2002) The idea of constitutional pluralism. Mod Law Rev 65:317–359
Walker N (2012a) Le constitutionnalisme multiniveaux. In: Troper M, Chagnollaud D (eds) Traité international de droit constitutionnel, vol 1. Dalloz, Paris, pp 441–462
Walker N (2012b) Postnational constitutionalism and postnational public law: a tale of two neologisms. Transnatl Leg Theory 3(1):61–86
Walker N (2015) Intimations of global law. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Walker N (2016) Constitutional pluralism revisited. Eur Law J 22(3):333–355
Walter C (1999) Die Europäische Menschenrechtskonvention als Konstitutionalisierungsprozess. Zeitschrift für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht 59:961–983
Ward I (2001) Beyond constitutionalism: the search for a European political imagination. Eur Law J 7:24–40
Webber J (2002) Institutional dialogue between courts and legislatures in the definition of fundamental rights: lessons from Canada (and elsewhere). In: Sadurski W (ed) Constitutional justice, east and west. Democratic legitimacy and constitutional courts in post-communist Europe in a comparative perspective. Kluwer Law International, The Hague, pp 61–99
Weiler JH (1999) The constitution of Europe. ‘Do the New Clothes Have an Emperor?’ and other essays on European Integration. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Weiler JHH (ed) (2000) The EU, the WTO and the NAFTA. Towards a common law of international trade. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Weiler JHH (2005) On the power of the word: Europe’s constitutional iconography. Int J Constit Law 3:173–190
Weiler JH, Wind H (eds) (2003) European constitutionalism beyond the state. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Wittgenstein L (2010) Le Cahier bleu et le Cahier brun. Gallimard, Paris
Wittgenstein L (2014) Recherches philosophiques. Gallimard, Paris
Wormuth FD (1949) The origins of modern constitutionalism. Harper & Row, New York
Yasuaki O (2006) A transcivilizational perspective on global legal order in the twenty-first century: a way to overcome west-centric and judiciary-centric deficits in international legal thoughts. Int Community Law Rev 8:29–63
Yeh J-R, Chang W-C (2008) The emergence of transnational constitutionalism: its features, challenges and solutions. Penn State Int Law Rev 27:89–124
Yoon Z-W (2009) Rechtsgeltung und Anerkennung. Probleme Der Anerkennungstheorie am Beispiel von Ernst Rudolf Bierling. Nomos, Baden-Baden
Zumbansen P (2010) Rough consensus and running code. A theory of transnational private law. Hart, Oxford
Zumbansen P (2011) Neither ‘Public’ nor ‘Private’, ‘National’ nor ‘International’: transnational corporate governance from a legal pluralist perspective. J Law Soc 38:50–75
Zumbansen P (2012a) Carving out typologies. Accounting for differences accross systems: towards a methodology of transnational constitutionalism. In: Rosenfeld M, Sajo A (eds) Oxford handbook of comparative constitutional law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 75–97
Zumbansen P (2012b) Varieties of comparative and global constitutionalism: the emergence of a transnational legal-pluralist-order. Gobal Constitutionalism 1:16–52
Metadaten
Titel
Debating Legal Pluralism and Constitutionalism: New Trajectories for Legal Theory in the Global Age
verfasst von
Guillaume Tusseau
Copyright-Jahr
2020
Buch
Debating Legal Pluralism and Constitutionalism

Print ISBN: 978-3-030-34431-3

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-030-34432-0

Copyright-Jahr: 2020

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-34432-0_1