LOEWE-Schwerpunkt Außergerichtliche und gerichtliche Konfliktlösung
Refine
Document Type
- Working Paper (23)
- Article (3)
- Review (3)
Has Fulltext
- yes (29)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (29)
Keywords
- Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) (3)
- Gerichte (3)
- Gesellschaft (3)
- Konfliktlösung (3)
- conflict resolution (3)
- society (3)
- Courts (2)
- Frühe Neuzeit (2)
- Juristenausbildung (2)
- Mediation (2)
Stability maintenance at the grassroots: China’s weiwen apparatus as a form of conflict resolution
(2013)
This working paper explores the history and potential of “stability maintenance” (weiwen) as a form of conflict resolution in China. Its emphasis on conflict resolution is novel. Previous examinations of the weiwen apparatus have concentrated on its political function, namely to manage resistance within society and maintain the authority of the party-state. This avenue of investigation has proved fruitful as a means of characterising the political motivation and the higher-level strategies involved in stability maintenance. Nonetheless, there remain significant conceptual and empirical gaps relating to how stability maintenance offices and processes actually function, particularly out of larger cities and at local levels. The research described in this paper aims to consider the effectiveness of stability maintenance as a part of the “market” for conflict resolution in local China, and to test the hypothesis that conflict resolution as facilitated by weiwen is the most pragmatic and effective means of actually resolving conflicts in the current Chinese political context, notwithstanding the closeness of the stability maintenance discourse to state authority and its relative distance from rule of law-based methods of dispute resolution...
The treatise "Contra malos divites et usurarios" (Cracovie, 1512) was the first of the renowned Polish anti-usurious texts which was not written by a university professor but by an official of the royal administration. Stanisław Zaborowski focuses, especially, on the problem of land of the royal domain given by kings to great landlords as a pledge, with harm to res publica. He applies the late medieval conciliarist notions to the issue of royal power. Nevertheless, the text diverges from the medieval thought. Zaborowski’ discourse does not focus on demonstrating the rightness of the anti-usurious principles but rather on convincing the readers to follow them in life. The argumentation is ‘addressed’ more to the will than to the reason; it focuses on the vice of avarice, more than on the Seventh Commandment; the author emphasizes the virtue of charity, more than on the virtue of justice. Anti-usurious Zaborowski’s thought made a part of his political vision. His discussed treatise is closely related with his more renowned Tractatus de natura iurium et bonorum regis. In Contra malos divites et usurarios, the problems of public debt and forced loan are of crucial importance. At present Marcin Bukała is preparing the critical edition of the treatise.
Der vorliegende Beitrag leitete das Programm des Workshops „Schlichten und Richten – Differenzierung und Hybridisierung” (Frankfurt/Main, 9./10. Februar 2012) ein. Mit diesem Workshop begann das Arbeitsprogramm des LOEWE–Schwerpunkts „Außergerichtliche und gerichtliche Konfliktlösung“, der am 1. Januar 2012 seine Tätigkeit aufgenommen hatte (siehe hierzu www.konfliktloesung.eu; eine leicht veränderte Fassung des Beitrags in englischer Sprache wird in Kürze abrufbar sein unter: http://www.ssrn.com/link/Max-Planck-Legal-History-RES.html ). Der Ausgangspunkt des Workshops ist eine deutsche Debattentradition, die die Alternativität von gerichtlichen und nichtgerichtlichen, kontradiktorischen oder konsensualen sowie mehr formalisierten und mehr informalisierten Konfliktlösungsformen unter dem Schlagwort „Schlichten oder Richten“ (auch „Schlichten statt Richten“ oder „Schlichten oder Richten“) thematisierte.
Der Beitrag problematisiert zunächst die bisherige mangelnde rechtshistorische Aufmerksamkeit, die Alternativen zur gerichtlichen Konfliktlösung zugewandt wurde. Er weist daraufhin, dass auch die heutige Diskussion über gelungenes Konfliktlösungsmanagement oft explizit oder implizit von – zuweilen nicht ausreichend reflektierten – historischen Vorannahmen geprägt ist und – damit verbunden – von Vorstellungen über rechtskulturelle Fremdheit und Nähe.
Im zweiten und dritten Abschnitt skizziert der Beitrag kurz den historischen Gang der deutschen Diskussion über „Schlichten und Richten“ seit dem Aufkommen auch rechtswissenschaftlich anerkannter Schlichtungsinstitutionen zu Beginn des 20. Jahrhunderts. Er versucht, deren wechselnde zeitgenössische Kontexte sichtbar zu machen und zeigt, wie sich in diesen Diskussionen (zuweilen utopisch scheinende) rechtspolitische Verheißungen ansiedeln konnten, welch fruchtbaren Boden diese Diskussionen aber auch für neue Kategorienbildungen und multidisziplinäre Zugänge bot.
Im vierten Abschnitt wird versucht, Verknüpfungen mit der gegenwärtigen ADR-Diskussionen herzustellen, während im fünften Abschnitt in analytischer Absicht Konfigurationen des Wortpaars „Schlichten“ und „Richten“ vorgestellt werden: „Schlichten“ und „Richten“ als Alternative, als Abhängigkeitsverhältnis und als Abfolge. Der fünfte Abschnitt schließlich fragt nach Funktionselementen und den Funktionsbedingungen von Schlichten und Richten, d.h.: Welche Leitrationalitäten, Partizipationsmechanismen, Legitimationsnarrative und Reflexionsformen lassen sich jeweils der einen oder anderen Form der Konfliktlösung zuordnen.
All diese Überlegungen sind eher tentativer Art und vermitteln nur erste umrisshafte Vorstellungen. Sie dienen in erster Linie dem Diskussionsanstoß und sollen erste Schneisen in dieses komplexe Forschungsfeld schlagen. Die Vortragsform ist beibehalten und der Fußnotenapparat ist auf das nötige Minimum reduziert.
Between the 12th and 16th centuries the Hanseatic merchants obtained extremely important privileges from the rulers of the countries with whom they traded. These secured their commercial and legal status and the autonomy of their staples in Flanders, England, Norway, Denmark and Russia. Within these privileges no other subject receives so extensive a treatment as court procedure. Here, the single most important concern of the Hanseatic merchants was their position in front of alien courts. The article analyses the great attention given to court procedure in the twenty main Hanseatic privileges: What did the merchants require? Which procedural rules were necessary to encourage them to submit their disputes to alien public court instead of taking the matter into their own hands and turning to extra-judicial methods to resolve matters, e.g. cancellation of business relations, boycotts or even trade wars? This analysis suggests that the two most important concerns reflected in the procedural rules were to avoid delay to the next trading trip and to ensure a rational law of proof. The former was addressed by pressing for short-term scheduling and swift judgment and by the dispensation from appearing before the court in person. The latter included avoidance of duels and other ordeals and the attempt to obtain parity by appointing half of the jurors from Hanseatic cities.
In ‘Strafe für fremde Schuld’ Harald Maihold uncovered how a doctrine of surrogate punishment in the legal treatises of the Salamanca school gradually gave way to the principle of guilt. This meant that punishment eventually could only be inflicted upon a culprit and no longer upon an innocent. We will use René Girard’s philosophy of (the disruption of) scapegoat mechanisms and sacrifice to develop a coherent interpretation not only of how this institution of surrogate punishment functioned, how it selected its victims and the way it was legitimated, but also of the theology that formed its background. We argue that most of what surrogate punishment is about can be grasped in two words: sacrificial logic. The elimination of surrogation from criminal law would then correspond to the rejection of this logic, an evolution which could be interpreted as a desacralisation or secularisation of criminal law under the influence of the upcoming principle of guilt.
This special issue of one of the leading German historical journals features case studies and a theoretical model to conceptualize multinormativity in the early modern period. The overarching concept that holds the contributions together is that of "normative competition" (Normenkonkurrenz), developed by Hillard von Thiessen. It offers a dynamic, interactive, and actor-centered approach to the co-existence of potentially conflicting normative orders in the early modern period. Von Thiessen draws attention to the manifold ways in which subjects consciously or unconsciously contribute to the shape and operation of norms. He offers an alternative to existing models that try to describe and explain normative change in the early modern period, such as Gerhard Oestreich’s model of "social discipline" (Sozialdisziplinierung) and Wolfgang Reinhard and Heinz Schilling’s model of"confessionalization" (Konfessionalisierung). In von Thiessen’s view, these models are inadequate. They are implicitly indebted to Max Weber’s paradigm of the gradual rationalization of Western civilization, and they assume a static opposition between norm-creating authorities and norm-receiving subjects. The models of "social discipline" and "confessionalization" start from the belief that citizens’ behavior gradually and homogeneously adapted to the norms laid down by the authorities. Recent historical scholarship has demonstrated that the top-down imposition of norms by state authorities and religious institutions often failed. A gap existed between the norms on the books and the norms in action, to the extent that daily life deviated from norms imposed by central authorities like the state or religious institutions in the first place. Von Thiessen, however, wants to avoid narratives of failure or success. Rather than starting from an antagonistic vision that pits institutional norm-producers against passive norm-receiving subjects, von Thiessen emphasizes the synergistic role played by all actors in the production and implementation of norms. ...
This paper is a prolegomenon to further study of the intensified relationship between law and moral theology in early modern times. In a period characterized by a growing anxiety for the salvation of the soul (»Confessional Catholicism«), a vast literature for confessors, which became increasingly juridical in nature, saw the light between roughly 1550 and 1650. By focussing on some of the most important Jesuit canonists and moral theologians, this article first seeks to explain why jurisprudence became regarded as an indispensable tool to solve moral problems. While Romano-canon law showed its merits as an instrument of precision to come to grips with concrete qualms of conscience, with the passing of time it also became studied for its own sake. The second part of this paper, therefore, illustrates how the legal tradition, particularly with regard to the law of obligations, was reshaped in the treatises of the moral theologians.
Legal pluralism calls into question the monopoly of the modern state when it comes to the production and the enforcement of norms. It rests on the assumption that juridical normativity and state organization can be dissociated. From an early modern historian’s perspective, such an assumption makes perfect sense, the plural nature of the legal order being the natural state of affairs in imperial spaces across the globe in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. This article will provide a case study of the collaborative nature of the interaction between spiritual and temporal legal orders in Spain and its overseas territories as conceived by Tomás de Mercado (ca. 1520–1575), a major theologian from the School of Salamanca. His treatise on trade and contracts (1571) contained an extended discussion of the government’s attempt to regulate the grain market by imposing a maximum price. It will be argued that Mercado’s view on the bindingness of economic regulations in conscience allowed for the internalization of the regulatory power of the nascent state. He called upon confessors to be strict enforcers of state law, considering them as fathers of the republic as much as fathers of faith. This is illustrative of the "collaborative form of legal pluralism" typical of the osmotic relationship between Church and State in the early modern Spanish empire. It contributed to the moral justification of state jurisdictions, while at the same time, guaranteeing a privileged role for theologians and religious leaders in running the affairs of the state.
"Every time a society finds itself in crisis it instinctively turns its eyes towards its origins and looks there for a sign." With this citation from Octavio Paz, the 1990 Nobel Prize winner in literature, Berman concluded his Law and Revolution: The Formation of the Western Legal Tradition in 1983. There is a sense in which, thirty years later, this quote remains utterly appropriate, certainly at the beginning of a re-assessment of Berman’s thoughts on the particular topic of the religious origins of modern commercial and financial institutions. Five years on from the start of the financial crisis, triggered by the collapse of Lehman Brothers on 15 September 2008, it is worthwhile recalling, perhaps, that the sign perceived by Berman in the history of mercantile law was a sign that pointed towards the fundamental interconnectedness of belief systems and business. Berman was profoundly convinced of the vital, historical link between religion, trust, and economic prosperity. ...