¿Tiene Francia una ventaja en la lucha antiterrorista?

Francia ha logrado combatir el terrorismo sin tener que imponer leyes de excepción, sino adaptando sus instituciones a los cambios en las prácticas terroristas. Francia, por desgracia, se encontró con el terrorismo islámico relativamente pronto. En 1986, Francia pasaba a ser el primer país en sufrir una nueva forma de terrorismo islámico. La condición principal para el éxito de la opción judicial es garantizar una interrelación apropiada entre los servicios de inteligencia y los judiciales. Ello se ve facilitado por la tradición francesa de centralización y por la tradición legal francesa que le concede al juge d’instruction amplias facultades para recopilar pruebas. La clave de la eficacia francesa no se debe únicamente a la inherente flexibilidad de su sistema penal, sino a los persistentes esfuerzos que ha realizado para ofrecer a la policía y los tribunales la legislación penal necesaria para enfrentarse al problema. La globalización provoca cierta relación homotética entre las modalidades del terrorismo y las instituciones que lo combaten: si hubo un tiempo en el que se necesitaban grandes organismos para hacer frente al reto de la confrontación entre Estados, ahora los servicios antiterroristas necesitan unos organigramas más planos, cadenas de mando más cortas (quizá, incluso, no jerárquicas) y operaciones en red que imitan a las de las organizaciones terroristas. Esta relación homotética entre las nuevas formas de terrorismo internacional y las agencias públicas encomendadas con su castigo explica la creciente importancia de los servicios de inteligencia

Justicia transicional y justicia reconstitutiva || Transitional Justice and Reconstitutive Justice

RESUMEN. El presente trabajo contrapone dos versiones de la justicia transicional: para la primera, minimalista, se trata de una justicia ordinaria que solo es excepcional porque debe ejercerse en condiciones extremas que no afectan sin embargo a su naturaleza. En cambio, en la segunda concepción, la justicia sale profundamente transformada ante el tipo de violencia política que debe afrontar, e inaugura de forma permanente una posición diferente de la justicia en la democracia. El sentido profundo de la institución de una nueva categoría de crimen, el crimen contra la humanidad, es esta exigencia de repensar el papel de la justicia asignándole la tarea de proteger la política de sus gérmenes totalitarios, inherentes a la política misma. En este sentido, la justicia transicional no debe suprimir todo conflicto, ni desterrar toda vida política sino civilizarla, trazando claramente la frontera de lo inaceptable.   ABSTRACT. The aim of this work is to compare two versions of the term transnational justice: for the first one (the minimalist one), this concept regards to ordinary justice that is only exceptional because it must be exercised in extreme conditions that, nevertheless, do not affect to its nature. By contrast, for the second one, justice is deeply transformed by the type of political violence it has to confront, and transnational justice starts a new and different permanent position for justice inside of the democracy. Thus, the creation of a new crime category, the crime against humanity, obliges us to rethink the role of justice ascribing to it the task of protecting the politics from totalitarian germs that are inherent to politics itself.  In this sense, transnational justice should neither eliminate every conflict, nor banish all political life but to civilize this one, with the intention of clearly outlining the border of the unacceptable

Les normes de l’harmonie chinoise

Alors que le concept « d’État de droit socialiste » avait rythmé le discours politique de la fin des années 1990, l’idée d’une « société d’harmonie socialiste » vient aujourd’hui éclairer la réforme juridique chinoise d’une étrange lumière aux reflets visiblement plus marxistes que confucéens. Ce cadre théorique fait du droit un principe disciplinaire destiné à la construction morale de la société. Si le droit est perçu comme un instrument de légitimation du pouvoir, son usage reste donc implicitement encadré par un impératif premier, la pérennité du régime. Bien que les citoyens ordinaires soient de plus en plus nombreux à se saisir des outils normatifs qui leur sont désormais offerts, le Parti-État, trop inquiet de se laisser déborder, cherche à détruire les ferments démocratiques présents dans ses propres créations

The norms of Chinese harmony Disciplinary rules as social stabiliser A harmonious society is one in which the rule of law is given greater strength and authority

Whereas the concept of “ socialist rule of law” punctuated political discourse in the late 1990s, it is the idea of a “socialist harmonious society” that today casts a strange light, clearly more Marxist than Confucian, on Chinese legal reform. This theoretical framework turns law into a disciplinary principle dedicated to society’s moral construction. If law is seen as an instrument for legitimizing power, it remains implicitly but primarily subordinate to the regime’s durability. Although more and more ordinary citizens are seizing hold of normative tools being put at their disposal, the party-state, fearful of being outflanked, is seeking to snuff out the democratic ferment contained in forces it has itself unleashed

IUC Independent Policy Report: At the End of the End of History

The IUC Independent Policy Report was drafted by the IUC Legal Standards Research Group, organized by a Steering Committee chaired by Ugo Mattei (International University College of Turin), coordinated by Edoardo Reviglio (International University College of Turin) and Giuseppe Mastruzzo (International University College of Turin), and composed by Franco Bassanini (University of Rome “La Sapienza”), Guido Calabresi (Yale University), Antoine Garapon (Institut des Hautes Etudes sur la Justice, Paris), and Tibor Varady (Central European University, Budapest). Contributors include Eugenio Barcellona (Eastern Piedmont University), Mauro Bussani (University of Trieste), Giuliano G. Castellano (Ecole Polytechnique Preg/CRG), Moussa Djir´e (Bamako University), Liu Guanghua (Lanzhou University), Golnoosh Hakimdavar (University of Turin), John Haskell (SOAS), Jedidiah J. Kroncke (Yale Law School), Andrea Lollini (Bologna University), Alberto Lucarelli (Federico II University), Boris N. Mamlyuk, (University of Turin), Alberto Monti (Bocconi University), Sergio Ariel Muro (Torquato di Tella University), Domenico Nicol`o (Mediterranean University of Reggio Calabria), and Nicola Sartori (University of Michigan). The IUC Independent Policy Report argues for a radical change of perspective, capable of restoring the supremacy of the law over the economic system. It is not only about finance, nor is it only about economics or policy. In this sense a transnational set of normative principles is needed in order to establish a global legal system capable of controlling economic processes, rather than being controlled by them. Within this framework a series of policy proposals are presented in order to effectively implement a new system of global standards. The current Western standard of living is unsustainable. Should the rest share the model of development of the West, our planet will simply not be capable of resisting the growth in consumption and pollution. Within this fundamental setting of scarcity in resources, using the rhetoric of the end of history as the polar star for growth, development and ultimately happiness of the whole world is simply a cynical lie. We argue here for the beginning of a necessary process aimed at the development of a legal system that is much less about creating an effcient backbone for an exploitive economy and much more about a vision of civilization, justice and respect where the laws of nature and those of humans converge in a sustainable long-term philosophy. Principles of justice, responsibility and long term environmental protection, rather than short term economic contingency and strong interests must set the legal agenda. A new governance and bottom-up inclusive integration of knowledge-based economies (wherever located), which is crucial to the very survival of humankind, cannot happen without defning new terms of a widely accepted standard of long term justice in the transnational context, hence the urgency to conceive legitimate transnational legal structures and possibly some apparatus of “superlegality.” The report is composed of fve sections. After having presented the pitfalls of the prevailing theoretical apparatus, an alternative cultural grid upon which policy actions should be shaped is presented. In this sense several normative proposals - revisiting the key characteristics of the current system - are offered aiming at acquiring a wider perspective over the actual global crisis

IUC Independent Policy Report: At the End of the End of History: Global Legal Standards: Part of the Solution or Part of the Problem?

This draft was presented at the seminar, Global Standards in the 21st Century, organized by the G8 Presidency in Rome at the Ministry of Economy and Finance and Villa Madama on the 11-12th of May 2009. The IUC Independent Policy Report was drafted by the IUC Legal Standards Research Group, organized by a Steering Committee chaired by Ugo Mattei (International University College of Turin), coordinated by Edoardo Reviglio (International University College of Turin) and Giuseppe Mastruzzo (International University College of Turin),The IUC Independent Policy Report prepared by a group of lawyers at the International University College of Turin was presented at the meeting convened by the G8 Presidency in Rome on May 12, 2009.The IUC Independent Policy Report was drafted by the IUC Legal Standards Research Group, organized by a Steering Committee chaired by Ugo Mattei (International University College of Turin), coordinated by Edoardo Reviglio (International University College of Turin) and Giuseppe Mastruzzo (International University College of Turin), and composed by Franco Bassanini (University of Rome “La Sapienza”), Guido Calabresi (Yale University), Antoine Garapon (Institut des Hautes Etudes sur la Justice, Paris), and Tibor Varady (Central European University, Budapest). Contributors include Eugenio Barcellona (Eastern Piedmont University), Mauro Bussani (University of Trieste), Giuliano G. Castellano (Ecole Polytechnique Preg/CRG), Moussa Djir´e (Bamako University), Liu Guanghua (Lanzhou University), Golnoosh Hakimdavar (University of Turin), John Haskell (SOAS), Jedidiah J. Kroncke (Yale Law School), Andrea Lollini (Bologna University), Alberto Lucarelli (Federico II University), Boris N. Mamlyuk, (University of Turin), Alberto Monti (Bocconi University), Sergio Ariel Muro (Torquato di Tella University), Domenico Nicol`o (Mediterranean University of Reggio Calabria), and Nicola Sartori (University of Michigan). The IUC Independent Policy Report argues for a radical change of perspective, capable of restoring the supremacy of the law over the economic system. It is not only about finance, nor is it only about economics or policy. In this sense a transnational set of normative principles is needed in order to establish a global legal system capable of controlling economic processes, rather than being controlled by them. Within this framework a series of policy proposals are presented in order to effectively implement a new system of global standards. The current Western standard of living is unsustainable. Should the rest share the model of development of the West, our planet will simply not be capable of resisting the growth in consumption and pollution. Within this fundamental setting of scarcity in resources, using the rhetoric of the end of history as the polar star for growth, development and ultimately happiness of the whole world is simply a cynical lie. We argue here for the beginning of a necessary process aimed at the development of a legal system that is much less about creating an effcient backbone for an exploitive economy and much more about a vision of civilization, justice and respect where the laws of nature and those of humans converge in a sustainable long-term philosophy. Principles of justice, responsibility and long term environmental protection, rather than short term economic contingency and strong interests must set the legal agenda. A new governance and bottom-up inclusive integration of knowledge-based economies (wherever located), which is crucial to the very survival of humankind, cannot happen without defning new terms of a widely accepted standard of long term justice in the transnational context, hence the urgency to conceive legitimate transnational legal structures and possibly some apparatus of “superlegality.” The report is composed of fve sections. After having presented the pitfalls of the prevailing theoretical apparatus, an alternative cultural grid upon which policy actions should be shaped is presented. In this sense several normative proposals - revisiting the key characteristics of the current system - are offered aiming at acquiring a wider perspective over the actual global crisi

Punition, liquidation, prévention : un nouveau rapport à l’histoire ?

Nous voudrions approfondir les trois moments du mouvement de judiciarisation qui a marqué ces dernières décennies et qui nourrissent une sorte de philosophie implicite de l’histoire : celui de la punition tout d’abord avec l’affirmation d’une justice pénale internationale depuis le procès de Nuremberg ; celui, plus récent, de liquidation qui s’illustre par la vague contemporaine de réparations de la colonisation, l’esclavage ou la déportation, considérées comme source de préjudices, et donc de dettes ; liquidation doit être ici pris dans le double sens d’évaluation en argent et de terminaison (on « liquide » le passé en le convertissant en un ensemble de dettes qui doivent être payées, en espérant – sans toujours en être bien conscient – un avenir libéré de toutes dettes). Une telle judiciarisation se marque enfin par une pensée de la prévention de l’histoire, et notamment des génocides. Mais dans quelle mesure est-il possible de réparer judiciairement ce qui relève du passé et de la mémoire ? Le jugement de l’histoire relève-t-il d’une compréhension historienne des faits ou de logiques très différentes (juridiques ou mercantiles par exemple) ?This paper explores three stages in society’s growing dependence on justice (a process called “judiciarisation”) over the last three decades, which feed into a sort of implicit philosophy of history : first, punishment, with the establishment of an international criminal justice system, starting with the Nuremberg trials ; then, more recently, liquidation, illustrated by the damages claimed for colonisation, slavery or deportation ; here, liquidation should be understood both as financial compensation and as termination (the past is “liquidated” as it is converted into a debt which must be settled, allowing –  more or less consciously or successfully – for a debt-free future). The final stage in the judiciarisation process has been prevention, particularly the prevention of genocides. However, is it really possible for the justice system to compensate for injuries which belong to the past and to memory ? Is the judgement of history part of the historical understanding of events, or is it part of entirely different rationales (judicial or commercial ones for instance)