Participation and Law's Authority

被引:0
作者
Soyemi, Eniola Anuoluwapo [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Oxford, Nuffield Coll, Oxford, England
关键词
participation; authority; positivism; postcoloniality; analytical jurisprudence;
D O I
10.1017/cjlj.2023.9
中图分类号
D9 [法律]; DF [法律];
学科分类号
0301 ;
摘要
This article argues that despite its claim to be most concerned with the nature of law in the generality of cases, legal positivism's almost exclusive focus on Anglo-American law has prevented the tradition from adequately answering the question of law's authority. This article argues that much positivist analysis either ignores, or takes for granted, the participation of the local population in the historical development of any given society's law and legal system. This failing means that positivism, and much of analytical jurisprudence, does not provide a truly general, non-circular explanation of authority that accounts as equally for post-colonial legal systems as it does for the Anglo-American systems with which positivism has been most concerned. I argue that the conceptual inadequacies in the explanations of law and legitimate authority offered by those such as H.L.A. Hart and Joseph Raz are most clearly exposed by post-colonial cases, such as Nigeria.
引用
收藏
页码:491 / 524
页数:34
相关论文
共 145 条
[1]  
Hart H.L.A., The Concept of Law, (2012)
[2]  
Green L., Introduction”, Legality, pp. 86-87, (2011)
[3]  
Chun S.M., The Anti-Democratic Origins of Analytical Jurisprudence” (2021, Jurisprudence, 12, 3, pp. 361-376
[4]  
Ford S.L., Settler Sovereignty: Jurisdiction and Indigenous People in America and Australia,, pp. 1788-1836, (2010)
[5]  
Fitzpatrick P., The Mythology of Modern Law, (1992)
[6]  
Shapiro, pp. 2-4
[7]  
Hart, pp. 239-240
[8]  
Finnis J., Natural Law and Natural Rights, (2011)
[9]  
The Morality of Law, (1969)
[10]  
Fuller L.L., Positivism and Fidelity to Law: A Reply to Professor Hart, Harv L Rev, 71, 4, (1958)