Use Of Legal Institutions Research Articles

Blockchain jako niestandardowa odpowiedź na ograniczenia prawa stanowionego w środowisku social mediów

Nowadays, most people use the Internet and social media. However, the Internet is a space in which there are various types of violations that are difficult to counteract with the use of legal institutions and tools, which are often not compatible with the fast-developing environment. The COVID-19 pandemic, which forced people to rearrange their lives in all fields and often move a significant part of their activities to the network, intensified negative phenomena including spreading false and socially harmful information. This article is an original reflection on the effectiveness of Polish legislation against the backdrop of the current activities of European Union bodies aimed at increasing the security of Internet users on the example of counteracting the dissemination of misinformation. In the author’s opinion, both national and EU authorities do not seem to be interested in searching for alternatives based on technological solutions that could foster prevention of such infringements on the Internet, but rather focus on improving conventional protection models, whose effectiveness seems to be questionable. The article aims to start an interdisciplinary debate on the possibility to reduce the number of negative phenomena in the social media environment using blockchain technology, including the discussion on the possibility of developing appropriate regulations in this regard.

Revisiting the emergence of the rule of law in Russia

In an extended comment on work by this paper’s authors, Gustafsson in a previous issue of this journal reaches scathing judgements on Russia’s arbitrazh (or commercial) courts and draws strong conclusions about the prospects for the rule of law in Russia. He concludes that litigants use the courts because they can bribe the judges. His paper revives old tales about the 1990s that we showed previously were myths. We examine Gustafsson’s argument both conceptually and empirically. We demonstrate that this argument rests on two erroneous assumptions: that the use of legal institutions equates with trust in these institutions and that strategies for use of law are not context-dependent. We show that Gustafsson’s empirical specification is not uniquely related to a single theory and indeed that one interpretation of his results is that enterprises use the courts because they perceive less corruption there than in other venues, a theory diametrically opposite to the one Gustaffson chose emphasise. Using a rich data set collected in Russia in 1997, we are led to the tentative conclusion that firms turned to the arbitrazh courts because of the relative quality of this institution.

Revisiting the Emergence of the Rule of Law in Russia

In an extended comment on work by this paper's authors, Gustafsson (2013) reaches scathing judgments on Russia's arbitrazh (or commercial) courts and draws strong conclusions about the prospects for the rule of law in Russia. He concludes that litigants use the courts because they can bribe the judges. His paper revives old tales about the 1990's that we showed previously were myths. We examine Gustafsson’s argument both conceptually and empirically. We demonstrate that this argument rests on two erroneous assumptions: that the use of legal institutions equates with trust in these institutions and that strategies for use of law are not context dependent. We show that Gustafsson's empirical specification is not uniquely related to a single theory and indeed that one interpretation of his results is that enterprises use the courts because they perceive less corruption there than in other venues, a theory diametrically opposite to the one Gustaffson chose emphasize. Using a rich data set collected in Russia in 1997, we are led to the tentative conclusion that firms turned to the arbitrazh courts because of the relative quality of this institution.

Про яскравий випадок невизначеності, або Правосуддя перехідного періоду і верховенство права

The aim of the paper is to describe relation between transitional justice and rule of law. The author starts with the analyses of genesis of two discourses transitional justice and rule of law. He claims that both of them started long time ago with human rights discourse and democracy. At present democracy has been replaced by rule of law discourse. There is internal paradox and tension between transitional justice which means adoption of mechanisms to replace traditional justice in countries in transitional and rule of law. When rule of law is based on autonomy of law form politics, transitional justice is extension of political will. When rule of law is focus on stability and not instrumental use of legal institutions something totally opposite is connected with transitional justice. The author suggest that what is needed is theoretical reconceptualization of rule of law.

SUD-PTT unionists: moral entrepreneurs?

Since its founding in 1988, the SUD-PTT union [Solidarité, Unité, Démocratie at the Poste, Télégraphe et Téléphone] has made using the courts a frequent mode of action in its dealings with the two French public-sector companies in which it is present, La Poste and France Télécom. Legal action is now fully part of SUD-PTT practices. This is surprising for a union so strongly attached to the protest tradition and hostile in both practice and discourse to any form of institutionalization. After considering possible explanations for SUD-PTT's heavy use of legal institutions, the article looks at how the type of conflict it engages in, which may be called “ conflit de règles ” [conflict about and by means of rules] can be linked to a major trend in contemporary social conflictuality: the fact that the “antagonistic posture” is no longer limited to collective action but is now operative in a more institutionalized approach. The thesis is that this sort of action is not just technical or instrumental but aims to exert pressure on norms, and thereby on the codification of social relations and ways of “living together”.

The Abolition of El Cortito, the Short-Handled Hoe: A Case Study in Social Conflict and State Policy in California Agriculture

In 1975, an administrative ruling by a California state agency, banned the use of el cortito, the short-handled hoe, as an occupational hazard to California farm workers. This study analyzes the conflict over the short-handled hoe, focusing on the legal and administrative actions from 1968 to 1975 which led to abolition of the tool. By comparing the problem of el cortito as defined by state policy, with the historical development of this occupational hazard, I question the use of legal institutions and the state arena as a means for resolving issues of social conflict.