Follow Public Reason
Join Public Reason
- Academia (64)
- Articles (23)
- Awards (30)
- Blogosphere (20)
- Books (115)
- Calls for Papers (263)
- Conferences (270)
- Discussion (45)
- Fellowships (57)
- Grad Conferences (56)
- Housekeeping (11)
- Jobs (36)
- Journals (44)
- Notices (829)
- Podcast (18)
- Politics (28)
- Posts (215)
- Problems (29)
- Public Philosophy (14)
- Radio (1)
- Reading Group (122)
- Seminars (12)
- Symposia (27)
- Teaching (10)
- Uncategorized (2)
- Video (2)
- Working Papers (17)
Author Archives: Claudio Corradetti
Call for Papers Workshop “Hegemony in the International Order” June 11-12, 2018 University of Rome Tor Vergata, Rome Co-Sponsored by the Transnational Theory Network (TLPT-Network), the Italian Society of Political Philosophy (SIFP) and the European Society of International Law (ESIL)
Post WWII international law and politics has promised a more just and free world. Liberal values of equality, human rights and freedom have shaped international relations, infusing also the ‘ethical turn’ of international law with the human rights revolution and the formalization of jus cogens peremptory norms. Regional orders like the EU have grown both in terms of centralized competences and in the possibility of allowing higher circulation of goods and people. The international political system as a whole has seen one of its greatest times of rights consolidation and economic fluxes which have certainly favored wide cultural contaminations.
Yet, more recent developments of international politics show some of the drawbacks of such epochal shift, raising demands of democratic governance, individual interests representation etc. Lack of political participation at the transnational level, the North-South and the East-West divides, migratory flows altogether signal a disconnection and a persistent friction between economic, legal and political sectors. What takes the appearance of a wide share of goods and benefits brought about by globalization turns into unequal forms of redistributory patterns, unmasking the reality of power-control and dominance of single actors, either in the form of a super-state or a multinational corporation.
Hegemonic entities seems therefore to have taken advantage of those spaces of economic and legal freedom that progressive liberalism has opened up and used them to the advantage of limited beneficiaries, exploiting the opportunities created therewith.
The workshop wants to investigate the contemporary significance of hegemony in the international realm. More specifically its aim is to assess whether and to what extent neo-Gramscian, neo-hegemonic or, alternatively, post-hegemonic forms of power help understanding law and politics in regional and global contexts.
Since hegemony requires support and complicity also by subordinated groups, how does this concept differ from the notion of imperialism and that of unilateralism? What forms of ideological solidarities as well as material and military alliances are necessary for hegemonic effectiveness?
Furthermore, are there hegemonic phases that have accompanied the so-called “human rights revolution” since the aftermath of WWII? In what ways, eventually, it is possible to trace a counter-history to the mantra of a global constitutional progression and peace?
Papers in philosophy, law or politics addressing any of the issues above or suggesting relevant insights into the topic. In order to allow time for adequate presentation and discussion only a limited number of people will be selected (approx.10).
Call for Papers Workshop 12-13 April 2018 The Legitimacy of Transnational Orders: Discussing the Idea of a World State – Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy – Boston College
Scholars in the field of legal and political theory are to a large extent familiar with the Kantian analysis of the options available beyond the State. How can states be coerced by a body which does not respond to its own sovereign will? More in general, what is normatively desirable? What is practically realizable? Can this divide even be closed?
The possibilities on offer here range from mere adjudicative forms of international arbitration, to a voluntarily leagues of states and finally to the possibility of conceiving a demanding State of States, either a Republic or, undesirably, a World Monarchy. All such legal and institutional configurations generate a host of complex issues concerning, for instance, the attribution of authority, the supranational transferring of sovereignty, or even the discussion of the legitimacy of adjudicative bodies.
Historically, the debate on power and authority has proceed in parallel with the ‘discovery of the new world’ as well as with the definition of territorial rights and the right to visit which has followed up until Kant.
Mindful of such legal-philosophical ascendants, the workshop seeks to explore the contemporary significance of a World State in all its possible conceptual and empirical declinations, alternatively, as a normative ideal, as a factual hegemonic distortion of the society of peoples, or even as a response to the international context marked by regime fragmentation and legal pluralism. To this purpose, some of the core questions will include: what reasons are available to the justification of a centralized States’ coordination and law production? What imaginative patterns can help reflecting upon the global extension of the European Union model?
Recent philosophical reflection, as with J.Habermas’s idea of a “divided sovereignty at the root”, has tried to explain how States can be seen capable of delegating competences and still remain autonomous entities. Are there alternative ways to solve this sovereignty dilemma?
The workshop welcomes a variety of interdisciplinary contributions disclosing the perils and the possible solutions for the idea of a World State widely conceived. No commitment or preference is pre-assigned to any of the possibilities mentioned above. Presentations and discussions will be conducted therefore in a genuine spirit of open assessment of options presented.
Organizers are Professor Claudio Corradetti (University of Rome “Tor Vergata”) and Professor Vlad Perju (Boston College). Interested participants may contact either organizer with questions about the workshop. This Conference is organized under the aegis of the Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy at Boston College. More information about the Center is available here: http://www.bc.edu/centers/cloughcenter.html
Scholars are invited to submit abstracts of no more than 500 words by February 28, 2018 to firstname.lastname@example.org with the title “Abstract: World State Conference”. We are seeking original “concept” or “ideas” papers that will facilitate the discussion. With this in mind, we expect the final papers to be around 5,000 words.
The Clough Center will cover transportation and accommodation costs.
Symposium: Cosmopolitan Law and the Courts in Transnational Legal Theory 2016 (Taylor&Francis, Routledge)
Excerpt from the Introduction by C.Corradetti
The thesis of a “cosmopolitan turn” of a state’s constitutionalism has quite extensively influenced the debate over the contemporary transformation of international law. A Copernican revolution of sorts, it has consisted not only of a phenomenological shift, but also of the creation of a new paradigm for the definition of legitimate domestic orders. The cosmopolitan turn has also run parallel to the constitutionalization of international law. Here, constitutionalization is neither simply a process of legalization nor, obviously, a constitution as such. This is due to the fact that constitutionalization implies a number of processes which international law undergoes together with a multiplicity of purposes that are served therewith. It indicates the transformation of bilateral or multilateral agreements into higher order principles of wider scope. In order for this transformation to be possible, a shift in reasoning should precede, one moving away from an instrumental, technocratic form into a value-based approach of legal reasoning. This value inclusion within legal thinking is what the term “constitutionalism” aims to capture. As a mode of reasoning — as a “mindset” — constitutionalism brings about the conditions of a rule of law conceived around the standard of equality, human dignity, or freedom. Constitutionalism indicates also a process of self-reflexivity. It provides a meta-framework from which to evaluate the legitimacy of its own constitutions, their finality and role within transnational law […].
A position as professor (or associate professor) is announced at PluriCourts, a Centre for the Study of the Legitimate Roles of the Judiciary in the Global Order. PluriCourts is a multidisciplinary Centre of Excellence at the Department of Public and International Law, Faculty of Law, University of Oslo. The Faculty may appoint an associate professor if no applicant is found qualified as professor.
While at PluriCourts the candidate will primarily conduct research, with the exception of 10 % workload of tasks such as teaching and supervision. More teaching and supervision may be agreed with the Faculty. The position will be integrated in the Faculty of Law when PluriCourts expires in the year 2023, at which time the position will have the same obligations concerning research, teaching and administrative tasks as other professors at the Faculty.
Call for Papers – Global Constitutionalism without Global Democracy, Florence EUI, January 14-15, 2016
International law is undergoing several profound transformations. New sectors develop as with the consolidation of the regime of Investment Arbitration or with the advancement of already existing areas as with the WTO. At the same time, claims about the “judicialization” of international law and processes of “global constitution” call for more precise definitions of terms such as
‘constitutionalism’, ‘constitution’ and ‘constitutionalisation’.
The starting assumption of the workshop is that domestic and global constitutionalism have in common several structural features but not that of democracy and legitimacy. Should global constitutionalism incorporate mechanisms and standards of democratic rule? If so how?
Theorizing Transitional Justice
Claudio Corradetti, European Academy of Bolzano
Nir Eisikovits, Suffolk University, Boston
Jack Rotondi, Suffolk University, Boston
The field of Transitional Justice – the interdisciplinary study of how countries emerge from civil strife and mass atrocity – has grown exponentially in recent years.
From the painful tradeoffs between peace and justice involved in the work of South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission, to the surprising success of the International Criminal Tribunal for Yugoslavia; from Rwanda’s innovative, controversial experiment in traditional criminal justice to the recent prominent indictments made by the International Criminal Court in the Hague – the field offers one of the most fascinating and politically important opportunities for scholars and practitioners to combine their insights and shape international norms of conduct. Nevertheless, actual transitional justice practices often fail to take a broad, systemic approach to political repair. For instance, while retributive justice measures play a crucial role in addressing past human rights abuses, when these measures are not supplemented by further initiatives reconstructing the social texture, their efficacy in promoting a transition to civil society remains questionable. Indeed, the study of transitional justice itself suffers from a similar shortcoming and remains significantly under-theorized. Few attempts have been made to explore the theoretical questions and conceptual problems that cut across the different disciplinary inquiries.