Judges under stress: Legal complexes and a sociology of hope
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl.1895Keywords:
judges, lawyers, legal complex, political liberalism, civil society, abogados, jueces, complejo jurídico, liberalismo político, sociedad civilAbstract
How does the sociology of legal complexes contribute to understanding of judges under stress in the shaping of legal-liberal political orders? First, the article proposes six distinctive meanings of judges and judiciaries. Second, it identifies stressors that erode the legitimacy and efficacy of different categories of judges. Third, illustrated by scholarship on Egypt, Pakistan, Taiwan and Hong Kong, it proposes that a theory of domestic and international legal complexes sharpens explanations of robustness of judges’ ability to cope with stress. Fourth, it argues that evidence on legal complexes can move scholarship on judges under stress from static frameworks of social structures to the dynamics of a sociology of hope where structural resourcefulness and repertoires of action multiple the opportunities for resisting stress. Fifth, after identifying contingencies that can relieve stress on judges and judiciaries, the paper concludes points to a redemptive irony of repression by authoritarian rulers.
¿Cómo contribuye la sociología de los complejos jurídicos a la comprensión de los jueces sometidos a tensión en la conformación de órdenes políticos jurídico-liberales? En primer lugar, el artículo propone seis significados distintivos de los jueces y los poderes judiciales. En segundo lugar, identifica los factores de estrés que erosionan la legitimidad y la eficacia de diferentes categorías de jueces. En tercer lugar, ilustrado con estudios sobre Egipto, Pakistán, Taiwán y Hong Kong, propone que una teoría de los complejos jurídicos nacionales e internacionales agudiza las explicaciones sobre la solidez de la capacidad de los jueces para hacer frente al estrés. En cuarto lugar, se sostiene que las pruebas sobre los complejos jurídicos pueden hacer que los estudios sobre los jueces sometidos a estrés pasen de los marcos estáticos de las estructuras sociales a la dinámica de una sociología de la esperanza en la que los recursos estructurales y los repertorios de acción multiplican las oportunidades de resistir al estrés. En quinto lugar, tras identificar las contingencias que pueden aliviar el estrés de los jueces y las judicaturas, el artículo termina señalando una ironía redentora de la represión por parte de los gobernantes autoritarios.
Downloads
Metrics
Downloads:
First_Online_Halliday_OSLS 106
References
Aziz, S., 2012. Liberal Protagonists? The Lawyers’ Movement in Pakistan. In: T.C. Halliday, L. Karpik and M.M. Feeley, eds., Fortunes and Misfortunes of Political Liberalism: The Legal Complex in the Post-Colony [online]. New York: Cambridge University Press. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139002981.013 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139002981.013
Bojarski, Ł., 2021. Civil Society Organizations for and with the Courts and Judges—Struggle for the Rule of Law and Judicial Independence: The Case of Poland 1976–2020. German Law Journal [online], 22(7), 1344–84. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/glj.2021.72 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/glj.2021.72
Braithwaite, V., 2004a. Collective Hope. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science [online], 592(1), 6–15. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716203262049
Braithwaite, V., ed., 2004b. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science [online], 592(1). Available at: https://journals.sagepub.com/toc/anna/592/1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716203262049
Chan, J., 2022a. National Security Law 2020 in Hong Kong: One Year On. Academia Sinica Law Journal [online], 2022, 39–101. Available at: https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3956272 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3956272
Chan, J., 2022b. Taking Rights Seriously – The Hong Kong Judiciary at a Challenging Time. Hong Kong Law Journal [online], 52(3), 937–64. Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4319985
Feeley, M., 2002. The Bench, the Bar, and the State: Judicial Independence in Japan and the United States. In: M.M. Feeley and S. Miyazawa, eds., The Japanese Adversary System in Context. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 105–35.
Feeley, M., 2012. Judge and Company: Courts, Constitutionalism and the Legal Complex. In: T.C. Halliday, L. Karpik and M.M. Feeley, eds., Fates of Political Liberalism in the British Post-Colony: The Politics of the Legal Complex [online]. New York: Cambridge University Press, 493–522. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139002981.019 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139002981.019
Feeley, M., and Langford, M., eds., 2021a. The Limits of the Legal Complex: Nordic Lawyers and Political Liberalism [online]. Oxford University Press. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192848413.001.0001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192848413.001.0001
Feeley, M., and Langford, M., 2021b. Nordic Exceptionalism and the Legal Complex. In: M.M. Feeley and M. Langford, eds., The Limits of the Legal Complex: Nordic Lawyers and Political Liberalism [online]. Oxford University Press, 13–67. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192848413.003.0002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192848413.003.0002
Feeley, M., and Miyazawa, S., 2007. The State, Civil Society, and the Legal Complex in Modern Japan: Continuity and Change. In: T.C. Halliday, L. Karpik and M.M. Feeley, eds., The Legal Complex and Struggles for Political Liberalism. Oxford: Hart, 151–92.
Finnemore, M., and Jurkovich, M., 2020. The Politics of Aspiration. International Studies Quarterly [online], 64(4), 1–11. Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3637566 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqaa052
Ghias, S.A., 2012. Miscarriage of Chief Justice: Lawyers, Media, and the Struggle for Judicial Independence in Pakistan. In: T.C. Halliday, L. Karpik and M.M. Feeley, eds., Fates of Political Liberalism in the British Post-Colony: The Politics of the Legal Complex. New York: Cambridge University Press, 340–77. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139002981.014
Ginsburg, T., 2007. Law and the Liberal Transformation of the Northeast Asian Legal Complex in Korea and Taiwan. In: T.C. Halliday, L. Karpik and M. Feeley, eds., Fighting for Political Freedom: Comparative Studies of the Legal Complex and Political Change. Oxford: Hart, 43–64.
Graver, H.P., 2018. Judicial Independence Under Authoritarian Rule: An Institutional Approach to the Legal Tradition of the West. Hague Journal of Rule of Law [online], 10, 317–39. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40803-018-0071-8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40803-018-0071-8
Graver, H.P., 2021a. The Legal Complex and the Rule of Law under Attack. IILACE Conference. Copenhagen.
Graver, H.P., 2021b. The Legal Complex: Denmark and Norway under German Occupation 1940–1945 In: M.M. Feeley and M. Langford, eds., The Limits of the Legal Complex: Nordic Lawyers and Political Liberalism [online]. Oxford University Press, 175–99. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192848413.003.0006 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192848413.003.0006
Graver, H.P., 2024. Valiant Judges, Iniquitous Law Thirteen Stories of Heroes of the Law [online]. London: Routledge. Available at: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003395324 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003395324
Graver, H.P., and Čuroš, P., 2021. Judges Under Stress: Understanding Continuity and Discontinuity of Judicial Institutions of the CEE Countries. German Law Journal [online], 22(7), 1147–58. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/glj.2021.73 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/glj.2021.73
Halliday, T.C., 1987. Beyond Monopoly: Lawyers, State Crises, and Professional Empowerment. University of Chicago Press.
Halliday, T.C., 2010. “The Conscience of Society?” The Legal Complex, Religion, and the Fates of Political Liberalism. In: S. Cummings, ed., The Paradox of Professionalism: Lawyers and the Possibility of Justice. New York: Cambridge University Press, 50-67. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511921506.004
Halliday, T.C., 2013. Why the Legal Complex is Integral to Theories of Consequential Courts. In: D. Kapiszewski, G. Silverstein and R.A. Kagan, eds., Consequential Courts: Judicial Roles in Global Perspective [online]. New York: Cambridge University Press, 337–48. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139207843.017 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139207843.017
Halliday, T.C., 2019. The International Legal Complex: Wang Yu and the Global Response to Repression of China's Rights’ Lawyers. In: R. Greenspan, H. Aviram and J. Simon, eds., The Legal Process and the Possibility of Justice: Research in the Tradition of Malcolm Feeley [online]. New York: Cambridge University Press, 289–313. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108234979.016 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108234979.016
Halliday, T.C., 2023. Global Legal Change from Above and Below. Journal of Law and Society [online], 50(3), 1-27. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/jols.12444 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jols.12444
Halliday, T.C., and Karpik, L., eds., 1997. Lawyers and the Rise of Western Political Liberalism: Europe and North American from the Eighteenth to Twentieth Centuries [online]. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198262886.001.0001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198262886.001.0001
Halliday, T.C., and Shaffer, G., 2015. Researching Transnational Legal Orders. In: T.C. Halliday and G. Shaffer, eds., Transnational Legal Orders. New York: Cambridge University Press, 473–528. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107707092.019
Halliday, T.C., Karpik, L., and Feeley, M.M., eds., 2007a. Fighting for Political Freedom: Comparative Studies of the Legal Complex for Political Change. Oxford: Hart.
Halliday, T.C., Karpik, L., and Feeley, M.M., 2007b. The Legal Complex in Struggles for Political Liberalism. In: T.C. Halliday, L. Karpik and M. Feeley, eds., Fighting for Political Freedom: Comparative Studies of the Legal Complex and Political Change. Oxford: Hart, 1–42.
Halliday, T.C., Karpik, L., and Feeley, M.M., eds., 2012. Fates of Political Liberalism in the British Post-Colony: The Politics of the Legal Complex [online]. New York: Cambridge University Press. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139002981 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139002981
Halliday, T.C., Zilberstein, S., and Espeland, W., 2021. Protecting Basic Legal Freedoms: International Legal Complexes, Accountability Devices, and the Deviant Case of China. Annual Review of Law and Social Science [online], vol 17, 159–80. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-111620-013613 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-111620-013613
Hilbink, L., 2007. Politicising Law to Liberalise Politics: Anti-Francoist Judges and Prosecutors in Spain’s Democratic Transition. In: T.C. Halliday, L. Karpik and M. Feeley, eds., Fighting for Political Freedom: Comparative Studies of the Legal Complex and Political Change. Oxford: Hart, 403–38.
Hsu, C.F., 2021. The Legal Complex Fractured: Legal Professional Coalition and Collision in Taiwan's Judicial Reform. Law & Policy [online], 43(3), 262–84. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/lapo.12171 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/lapo.12171
Karpik, L., 1985. Avocat: Une Nouvelle Profession? Revue Française de Sociologie [online], 26(4), 571–600. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2307/3321358 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3321358
Karpik, L., 1988. Lawyers and Politics in France, 1814–1950: the State, the Market, and the Public. Law and Social Inquiry [online], 13(4), 707–36. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-4469.1988.tb01133.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-4469.1988.tb00569.x
Karpik, L., 1997. Builders of Liberal Society: French Lawyers and Politics. In: T.C. Halliday and L. Karpik, eds., Lawyers and the Rise of Western Political Liberalism: Europe and North America from the Eighteenth to Twentieth Centuries [online]. Oxford University Press, 125–66. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198262886.003.0004 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198262886.003.0004
Karpik, L., 1999. French Lawyers: A Study in Collective Action, 1274–1994. Oxford University Press.
Karpik, L., and Halliday, T.C., 2011. The Legal Complex. Annual Review of Law and Social Science [online], 7, 217–36. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-102510-105512 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-102510-105512
Kurban, D., Forthcoming. The dual impact of supranational regimes in authoritarian contexts: The Case of Turkey In: G. Shaffer and W. Sandholz, eds., The Rule of Law Under Pressure. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Liu, S., and Halliday, T.C., 2016. Criminal Defense in China: The Politics of Lawyers at Work [online]. New York: Cambridge University Press. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316677230 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316677230
Liu, S., Hsu, C.F., and Halliday, T.C., 2019. Law as a Sword, Law as a Shield: Politically Liberal Lawyers and the Rule of Law in China. China Perspectives [online], 2019–1, 65–73. Available at: https://doi.org/10.4000/chinaperspectives.8798 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/chinaperspectives.8798
Mate, M., 2012. “Priests in the Temple of Justice”: The Indian Legal Complex and the Basic Structure Doctrine. In: T.C. Halliday, L. Karpik and M.M. Feeley, eds., Fates of Political Liberalism in the British Post-Colony: The Politics of the Legal Complex [online]. New York: Cambridge University Press, 112–48. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139002981.006 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139002981.006
Ming-sho, H., 2020. How Protests Evolve: Hong Kong's Anti-Extradition Movement and Lessons Learned from the Umbrella Movement. Mobilization [online], 25(S1), 711–28. Available at: https://doi.org/10.17813/1086-671X-25-5-711 DOI: https://doi.org/10.17813/1086-671X-25-5-711
Moustafa, T., 2007a. Mobilising the Law in an Authoritarian State: The Legal Complex in Contemporary Egypt. In: T.C. Halliday, L. Karpik and M.M. Feeley, eds., The Legal Complex and Struggles for Political Liberalism. Oxford: Hart, 193–218.
Moustafa, T., 2007b. The Struggle for Constitutional Power: Law, Politics, and Economic Development in Egypt [online]. New York: Cambridge University Press. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511511202 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511511202
Munir, D., 2012. From Judicial Autonomy to Regime Transformation: The Role of the Lawyers’ Movement in Pakistan. In: T.C. Halliday, L. Karpik and M.M. Feeley, eds., Fates of Political Liberalism in the British Post-Colony: The Politics of the Legal Complex [online]. New York: Cambridge University Press, 378–411. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139002981.015 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139002981.015
Rajah, J., 2011. Punishing Bodies, Securing the Nation: How Rule of Law Can Legitimate the Urbane Authoritarian State. Law and Social Inquiry [online], 36(4), 945–70. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-4469.2011.01257.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-4469.2011.01257.x
Rajah, J., 2012a. Authoritarian Rule of Law: Legislation, Discourse and Legitimacy in Singapore [online]. New York: Cambridge University Press. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511998201 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511998201
Rajah, J., 2012b. Lawyers, Politics and Publics: State Management of Lawyers and Legitimacy in Singapore. In: T.C. Halliday, L. Karpik and M.M. Feeley, eds., Fates of Political Liberalism in the British Post-Colony: The Politics of the Legal Complex [online]. New York: Cambridge University Press, 149–92. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139002981.008 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139002981.008
Tai, B., 2019. Stages of Hong Kong’s Democratic Movement. Asian Journal of Comparative Politics [online], 4(4), 352–80. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/2057891118815777 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2057891118815777
Tai, B., et al., 2020. Pursuing Democracy in an Authoritarian State: Protest and the Rule of Law in Hong Kong. Social & Legal Studies [online], 29(1), 107–45. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/0964663919869725 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0964663919869725
Tam, W., 2013. Legal Mobilization under Authoritarianism: The Case of Post-Colonial Hong Kong [online]. Cambridge University Press. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139424394 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139424394
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Terence Halliday
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
OSLS strictly respects intellectual property rights and it is our policy that the author retains copyright, and articles are made available under a Creative Commons licence. The Creative Commons Non-Commercial Attribution No-Derivatives licence is our default licence, further details available at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 If this is not acceptable to you, please contact us.
The non-exclusive permission you grant to us includes the rights to disseminate the bibliographic details of the article, including the abstract supplied by you, and to authorise others, including bibliographic databases, indexing and contents alerting services, to copy and communicate these details.
For information on how to share and store your own article at each stage of production from submission to final publication, please read our Self-Archiving and Sharing policy.
The Copyright Notice showing the author and co-authors, and the Creative Commons license will be displayed on the article, and you must agree to this as part of the submission process. Please ensure that all co-authors are properly attributed and that they understand and accept these terms.
