In the late eighteenth century, a Qing-centered, pluralistic legal order emerged in the Tibetan regions of the Qing empire. In the Gansu borderlands known to Tibetans as "Amdo," the Qing state established subprefectures to administer indigenous populations and prepare them for integration into the empire. In the 1790s, the Qianlong emperor asserted the dynasty's sovereignty in central Tibet and embarked on a program to reform the Tibetan government. This dissertation examines the nineteenth-century legacy of these policies from the twin perspectives of the indigenous people of the region and the officials dispatched to manage them. On the basis of Manchu and Tibetan-language sources, Part One argues that the exercise of Qing sovereignty in central Tibet was connected to the Qianlong court's desire to monopolize indigenous arts of divination, especially as they related to the identification of prominent reincarnations. The Qing court exported a Ming-era bureaucratic technology--a lottery, and repurposed it as a divination technology--the Golden Urn. The successful implementation of this new ritual, however, hinged on the astute use of legal cases and the intervention of Tibetan Buddhist elites, who found a home for the Urn within indigenous traditions. / East Asian Languages and Civilizations

Administrative justice is traditionally considered as the main alternative to the criminal justice system when a certain illegality is decriminalized or not enforced by criminal justice institutions (e.g. the regulation of elite deviance, urban disorder, mental health, etc.). This doctoral thesis studies how the conflicts related to immigration are being managed in the largest administrative tribunal in Canada: the Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB). It asks how exactly does immigration justice, and administrative law more broadly, constitute an alternative to criminal justice in terms of social reaction, and what kinds of challenges does this alternative present for the study of social control. This research takes a qualitative approach based on documentary analysis and long-term ethnographic fieldwork conducted at the IRB between 2007 and 2009. It uses its own theoretical framework building on post-structural perspectives, including Bourdieu’s constructivist structuralism, governmentality and nodal governance studies, left realism and political economy of punishment. In the empirical part of the thesis, I present some of the characteristics of the legal translation of conflicts in immigration law, including the forms and logics of punishment involved and how immigration law is practiced at the tribunal. I argue that administrative adjudication and punishment differ substantially from criminal law regimes and I question the idea of criminalization (of immigration) as a category capable of nuancing the complexity of administrative forms of social reaction. Instead, I suggest that we should take these forms of punitive social reaction as they are, and study how they operate along, beyond and in addition to criminal law. I propose an integrated conception of the penal complex which works as a mobile (kinetic sculpture) and includes the criminal law realm, but also other normative systems that configure ‘less’ prominent locations of punishment playing an increasing role in social reaction. I conclude by proposing a new reading of selectivity of justice and penal policies, and consequently, a new agenda for criminology and criminologists. In this new agenda, the penal complex should be taken as a totality in order to promote broader and combined propositions for law reform and resistance to punitiveness.

Jugé excessivement protecteur à l’égard des investisseurs étrangers au cours des deux dernières décennies, le droit international des investissements fait face aujourd’hui à une crise de légitimité́. L’industrie extractive est particulièrement touchée par ces critiques par les différentes allégations d’atteintes aux droits de l’homme et droit de l’environnement, et dont le traitement par les tribunaux d’investissement reste limité. En outre, le système juridique des pays en développement étant d’une part, fragmenté par l’articulation entre un droit local, national et international, voire transnationale par les nouveaux modes de régulation transnationale privée, et d’autre part, gangrené́ par des dérives corruptives, les populations locales ont un accès limité à la justice en cas de litiges avec les multinationales. En effet, la pratique consiste à̀ délocaliser le droit applicable au contrat d’investissement par les différentes techniques développées par le droit international, et singulièrement par les clauses contractuelles et l’arbitrage transnational. Cette étude propose donc de développer la notion « d’enclavement juridique» pour décrire ce phénomène auquel font face les pays en développement, et comprendre les raisons pour lesquelles l’investissement étranger, pourtant au centre de la concurrence des systèmes juridiques, a des impacts limités et localisés sur le développement de l’État hôte. / Considered as offering overprotection, international investment law faced a crisis of legitimacy. The extractive industry is particularly affected by criticisms of various allegations of human rights violations and environmental law, and their treatment by investment courts remains limited. Furthermore, the legal system of developing countries are fragmented by the articulation among local, national and international law, even transnational law with private regulations, and affected by corruptive drifts, the local populations have limited access to justice when disputes with multinationals occur. As a matter of fact, the practice consists of relocating the law applicable to the investment contract by the various techniques developed by international law, and particularly contractual clauses and transnational arbitration. This thesis develops the concept of "legal enclosure" to describe this phenomenon, and to explain the limited and localized impacts of foreign investments on the development of the host State.

In recent years, unmarried women in China face great pressure to marry when they reach their late 20s and beyond. These women are referred to as leftover women, a terminology that plays into the notion that they fail to sell themselves in the marriage market at the best timing. Based on interviews and focus groups with leftover women in China, this dissertation situates their choices in the complexities of social and legal orders in today’s China to make sense of their decisions. Starting with a postcolonial critique of current literature on leftover women, this dissertation revisits leftover women’s decisions and demonstrates how their choices are made after evaluating all the available options rather than decisions made out of false-consciousness. I discuss how societal and parental expectations interact with state law to affect leftover women’s choices in marriage and childbearing. To understand how leftover women navigate through multiple levels of social ordering, I investigate the legal consciousness of these women when they judge which level(s) of social ordering they should follow. My analysis of leftover women’s strategies in engaging with state law challenges the assumption that ordinary Chinese people’s reluctance to use the formal legal system is a result of their lack of legal knowledge. My interviewees’ emphasis on family relations and public attitudes regarding marriage and childbearing complicates and contributes to feminist relational theory by questioning its strong attachment to autonomy. Building on postcolonial feminist legal thoughts, I advocate that feminist relational theorists need to distance themselves from autonomy in order to understand the choices made by women who prioritize familialism over individualism. To unsettle feminist relational theory’s unconditional attachment to autonomy, I elaborate on leftover women’s understandings of the relationship between the self and the family and other people in their social networks. This elaboration is achieved by investigating the impact of societal and parental expectations, as well as leftover women’s participation in constructing the notions of filial piety and motherhood. This dissertation offers a detailed discussion of leftover women’s choices in marriage and childbearing by demonstrating their navigation through multiple levels of social ordering. It also provides a postcolonial analysis of the approach of “blaming culture,” which has been used by many scholars who study leftover women, as well as other issues concerning marginalized populations in authoritarian states such as China. At the same time, this dissertation illustrates a way of analyzing women’s choices without focusing on autonomy, which is of great importance for research on women whose culture prioritizes familialism over individualism. This dissertation also contributes to the areas of legal consciousness and legal pluralism by explaining ordinary people’s reluctance to separate state law and non-state social ordering. This is a timely empirical study aiming to serve as a springboard to invite future research on law and emotions, and law and family relations, relationships and legal consciousness, and postcolonial analysis of the impact of patriarchal Confucian culture and Chinese legal culture in general. / Graduate / 2022-06-02

The issue of legal pluralism in contemporary society Abstract This work aims to describe the phenomenon of legal pluralism, its expressions and functioning in contemporary society and evaluate the findings in connection with the weakening role of the state. The role of law is changing more and more in today's global world, especially in an increasingly less homogeneous society. The plurality of contemporary society is increasingly penetrating normative systems, which in turn affects the very functioning of the state as an authority. Legal pluralism reflects the life of contemporary society. From the perspective of legal pluralism, we gain a new understanding of law. The concept of legal pluralism enables the law to respond in a more flexible way to the plurality of contemporary society, as law increasingly faces difficulties in reflecting the social reality of contemporary society. Related to laws that do not reflect this plurality is a growing distrust of people in the state and its institutions, which contributes to the weakening role of the state. One of the possibilities for the state to strengthen its role is to restore confidence of the citizens in the state and its institutions. This can be also achieved by creating good written law. State law should take into account the phenomenon of legal...

L’Europe engendre des transformations majeures de l’État national, influence sa structure politique, sa conception de la démocratie et du droit, et produit des effets sur les rapports majorité minorités. Elle a pour effet d’éloigner l’État national du modèle traditionnel de l’État-Nation ethniquement ou culturellement homogène en l’amenant à reconnaître la pluralité de ses composantes nationales. Ces mutations sont le résultat du processus même d’intégration communautaire et des politiques de régionalisation et de décentralisation que favorisent les institutions européennes. Soumis au double processus d’intégration supranationale et de désagrégation infranationale, l’État national se transforme. Son rapport avec les minorités, également. L’Europe commande des aménagements de la diversité. Pour y arriver, elle impose un droit à la différence, lequel s’inscrit toujours dans la protection générale des droits de l’homme mais vise spécifiquement à reconnaître des droits identitaires ou poly ethniques aux personnes appartenant à des minorités, en tant que groupe, dans le but évident de les protéger contre la discrimination et l’intolérance. En faisant la promotion de ce droit à la différence, l’Europe propose un modèle alternatif à l’État-Nation traditionnel. La nation (majorité) peut désormais s’accommoder de la diversité. La nation n’est plus seulement politique, elle devient socioculturelle. En faisant la promotion du principe de subsidiarité, l’Europe incite à la décentralisation et à la régionalisation. En proposant un droit de la différence, l’Union européenne favorise la mise au point de mécanismes institutionnels permanents où la négociation continue de la normativité juridique entre groupes différents est possible et où l’opportunité est donnée aux minorités de contribuer à la définition de cette normativité. Le pluralisme juridique engendré par la communautarisation reste par ailleurs fortement institutionnel. L’État communautarisé détient encore le monopole de la production du droit mais permet des aménagements institutionnels de l’espace public au sein d’un ensemble démocratique plus vaste, donc l’instauration d’un dialogue entre les différentes communautés qui le composent, ce qui aurait été impensable selon la théorie classique de l’État-nation, du droit moniste et monologique. Ainsi, assistons-nous à la transformation progressive dans les faits de l’État-nation en État multinational. La question des minorités soulève un problème de fond : celui de l'organisation politique minoritaire. La volonté de respecter toutes les identités collectives, de donner un statut politique à toutes les minorités et de satisfaire toutes les revendications particularistes n’a pas de fin. L’État-Nation n’est certes pas le meilleur –ni le seul- modèle d’organisation politique. Mais l’État multinational constitue-t-il une alternative viable en tant que modèle d’organisation politique ? / The European Union provokes major transformations of the national state. It influences its political structure, its conception of democracy and of Law and it affects the majority-minority relations. It diverts the state from the traditional Nation-State model, ethnically and culturally homogenous, and makes it lean towards a pluralistic multinational state model. These changes are the results of the European integration process and its politics of regionalization and decentralisation. Subjected to both the supranational integration and the infranational disintegration, the Nation-State transforms itself. So does its relation to its minorities. By imposing the recognizance of a right to be different (droit à la difference), which is rooted in the individual protection of human rights, the European Union commands arrangements of the diversity. It allows the recognizance of identity and polyethnic rights to members of a minority and offers protection against discrimination and intolerance. Europe provides an alternative to the traditional Nation-State. From political, the nation becomes socio-cultural. By promoting decentralization and regionalization, in application of the principle of subsidiarity, the European Union favours the recognizance of a right to difference (droit de la difference) which permits the institutionalization of minorities and the creation of permanent mechanisms, where the minorities can participate to the public life and contribute to the elaboration of the norms that will apply to them. Legal pluralism engendered by the European Union is however very strongly institutionalized. The national state still holds the monopole of the production of law although it allows institutional arrangements within the public sphere and the instauration of a dialogue between the various communities that compose the state. Such a situation is not conceivable under the traditional theory of the Nation-State and its monist and monological conception of the Law. Slowly, under the pressure of the European Union, the national state tends towards the multinational model of political organization. The question of minorities raises a fundamental problem: the political organization of minorities. The will to respect all collective identities, to provide a political status to all minorities and to satisfy all their claims is endless. The Nation-State is surely not the best nor the only model of political organization for a state. But, is the multinational state a viable alternative? Key words: minorities, right to be different, right to difference, legal pluralism, multinational state, Nation-State, European Union, liberalism, communitarism

<p>The purpose of this essay was to examine municipal guidelines regarding the administration of the social assistance, collected from 18 municipalities in the Stockholm-area to achieve a greater understanding on how they were constructed in respect to the legislation and how the language mediated their contents. The legal aspects of the social assistance was studied through a jurisprudential method in which the legislative history, texts of laws and case laws were examined. The empirical aspect of this essay was studied through a hermeneutical method and analyzed through theories of social constructionism and legal pluralism. The results from the jurisprudential study were also used to understand how the municipal guidelines were constructed in relation to the law. The results of this essay corresponded well with previous studies in this field where considerable divergences in the approval of social assistance have been established. The guidelines allow a local adjustment of the social work stated in the Social service act, on the basis of local priorities and conditions. Our findings showed that the guidelines related to the law in varying degrees, to some extent depending on the stringency of the language used in them. We found expressions that were sometimes vague, normative and restrictive regarding the approval of social assistance. The results were discussed in respect to rule of law and the legal content of the guidelines.</p>

The purpose of this essay was to examine municipal guidelines regarding the administration of the social assistance, collected from 18 municipalities in the Stockholm-area to achieve a greater understanding on how they were constructed in respect to the legislation and how the language mediated their contents. The legal aspects of the social assistance was studied through a jurisprudential method in which the legislative history, texts of laws and case laws were examined. The empirical aspect of this essay was studied through a hermeneutical method and analyzed through theories of social constructionism and legal pluralism. The results from the jurisprudential study were also used to understand how the municipal guidelines were constructed in relation to the law. The results of this essay corresponded well with previous studies in this field where considerable divergences in the approval of social assistance have been established. The guidelines allow a local adjustment of the social work stated in the Social service act, on the basis of local priorities and conditions. Our findings showed that the guidelines related to the law in varying degrees, to some extent depending on the stringency of the language used in them. We found expressions that were sometimes vague, normative and restrictive regarding the approval of social assistance. The results were discussed in respect to rule of law and the legal content of the guidelines.

L’Europe engendre des transformations majeures de l’État national, influence sa structure politique, sa conception de la démocratie et du droit, et produit des effets sur les rapports majorité minorités. Elle a pour effet d’éloigner l’État national du modèle traditionnel de l’État-Nation ethniquement ou culturellement homogène en l’amenant à reconnaître la pluralité de ses composantes nationales. Ces mutations sont le résultat du processus même d’intégration communautaire et des politiques de régionalisation et de décentralisation que favorisent les institutions européennes. Soumis au double processus d’intégration supranationale et de désagrégation infranationale, l’État national se transforme. Son rapport avec les minorités, également. L’Europe commande des aménagements de la diversité. Pour y arriver, elle impose un droit à la différence, lequel s’inscrit toujours dans la protection générale des droits de l’homme mais vise spécifiquement à reconnaître des droits identitaires ou poly ethniques aux personnes appartenant à des minorités, en tant que groupe, dans le but évident de les protéger contre la discrimination et l’intolérance. En faisant la promotion de ce droit à la différence, l’Europe propose un modèle alternatif à l’État-Nation traditionnel. La nation (majorité) peut désormais s’accommoder de la diversité. La nation n’est plus seulement politique, elle devient socioculturelle. En faisant la promotion du principe de subsidiarité, l’Europe incite à la décentralisation et à la régionalisation. En proposant un droit de la différence, l’Union européenne favorise la mise au point de mécanismes institutionnels permanents où la négociation continue de la normativité juridique entre groupes différents est possible et où l’opportunité est donnée aux minorités de contribuer à la définition de cette normativité. Le pluralisme juridique engendré par la communautarisation reste par ailleurs fortement institutionnel. L’État communautarisé détient encore le monopole de la production du droit mais permet des aménagements institutionnels de l’espace public au sein d’un ensemble démocratique plus vaste, donc l’instauration d’un dialogue entre les différentes communautés qui le composent, ce qui aurait été impensable selon la théorie classique de l’État-nation, du droit moniste et monologique. Ainsi, assistons-nous à la transformation progressive dans les faits de l’État-nation en État multinational. La question des minorités soulève un problème de fond : celui de l'organisation politique minoritaire. La volonté de respecter toutes les identités collectives, de donner un statut politique à toutes les minorités et de satisfaire toutes les revendications particularistes n’a pas de fin. L’État-Nation n’est certes pas le meilleur –ni le seul- modèle d’organisation politique. Mais l’État multinational constitue-t-il une alternative viable en tant que modèle d’organisation politique ? / The European Union provokes major transformations of the national state. It influences its political structure, its conception of democracy and of Law and it affects the majority-minority relations. It diverts the state from the traditional Nation-State model, ethnically and culturally homogenous, and makes it lean towards a pluralistic multinational state model. These changes are the results of the European integration process and its politics of regionalization and decentralisation. Subjected to both the supranational integration and the infranational disintegration, the Nation-State transforms itself. So does its relation to its minorities. By imposing the recognizance of a right to be different (droit à la difference), which is rooted in the individual protection of human rights, the European Union commands arrangements of the diversity. It allows the recognizance of identity and polyethnic rights to members of a minority and offers protection against discrimination and intolerance. Europe provides an alternative to the traditional Nation-State. From political, the nation becomes socio-cultural. By promoting decentralization and regionalization, in application of the principle of subsidiarity, the European Union favours the recognizance of a right to difference (droit de la difference) which permits the institutionalization of minorities and the creation of permanent mechanisms, where the minorities can participate to the public life and contribute to the elaboration of the norms that will apply to them. Legal pluralism engendered by the European Union is however very strongly institutionalized. The national state still holds the monopole of the production of law although it allows institutional arrangements within the public sphere and the instauration of a dialogue between the various communities that compose the state. Such a situation is not conceivable under the traditional theory of the Nation-State and its monist and monological conception of the Law. Slowly, under the pressure of the European Union, the national state tends towards the multinational model of political organization. The question of minorities raises a fundamental problem: the political organization of minorities. The will to respect all collective identities, to provide a political status to all minorities and to satisfy all their claims is endless. The Nation-State is surely not the best nor the only model of political organization for a state. But, is the multinational state a viable alternative? Key words: minorities, right to be different, right to difference, legal pluralism, multinational state, Nation-State, European Union, liberalism, communitarism

L’activité professionnelle des acteurs sportifs suscite de la conflictualité. Les litiges qui en découlent sont extrêmement diversifiés. Matériellement, ils sont de nature associative ou contractuelle, administrative ou judiciaire, sociale, fiscale ou pénale, disciplinaire ou non disciplinaire. Territorialement, ils sont de dimension nationale ou internationale. Tous s’inscrivent dans un système de sources particulièrement étoffées : à des normes imposées aux acteurs (normes sportives, étatiques, supra-étatiques) se superposent des normes négociées par eux. Créant des interactions inévitables entre ces ensembles juridiques, un tel pluralisme juridique est à l’origine d’un véritable pluralisme de justice aux incidences processuelles et matérielles fortes.D’un point de vue processuel, qu’ils soient situés dans un ordre juridique national ou rattachés à un ordre juridique supranational ou transnational, les organes de justice ont des caractéristiques et des pouvoirs forts différents, mais répondent néanmoins à des logiques procédurales communes. Si les principes de répartition entre les divers modes de justice diffèrent selon que le litige sportif demeure dans la sphère nationale ou dépasse celle-ci, il reste que, dans leur ensemble, les juges interviennent dans une relation de combinaison, de complémentarité, plutôt que dans un rapport d’opposition.D’un point de vue du droit substantiel, cette démultiplication des juges n’en est pas pour autant malheureuse dans la mesure où ce pluralisme de justice vient, de son côté, opportunément consacrer et alimenter le pluralisme juridique sportif. Forts de leur action jurisprudentielle normative, ces juges, ces arbitres, participent, par une action isolée ou parfois dans le cadre d’un dialogue constructif, à une régulation adaptée et cohérente des différends liés à l’activité professionnelle des acteurs sportifs, en tenant compte des particularités de l’organisation du mouvement sportif et des rapports juridiques noués par ces derniers.Si bien qu’en définitive, les relations entre les phénomènes de pluralisme juridique et de pluralisme de justice participent d’un règlement des litiges sportifs fédéraux et de travail généralement conforme aux principes élémentaires de bonne justice et paraissant résolument adapté aux spécificités de l’activité professionnelle sportive. Ne serait-ce pas là, au fond, l’illustration saillante d’un « pluralisme ordonné » qui tend à respecter la diversité tout en permettant une harmonie d’ensemble ? / The professional activity of those involved in sport provokes much conflict. Consequent disputes are extremely diverse. Materially, they are associative or contractual, administrative or legal, social, fiscal or criminal, disciplinary or non-disciplinary in nature. Territorially, they are national or international. All fit into a particularly robust system of sources: norms imposed on actors (sporting rules, state rules, and supranational rules) overlap with norms negotiated by them. Creating inevitable interactions between these legal entities, such legal pluralism is the source of a true pluralism of justice with strong litigation and material consequences.From a procedural standpoint, whether they are attached to a national legal system or a supranational or transnational one, legal bodies have strongly different characteristics and powers, yet still meet a common procedural logic. In general, judges intervene with a combination and a complementary approach, rather than in an adversarial relationship, even if the principles of distribution between the various methods of justice differ, whether a sporting dispute remains within the domestic sphere or exceeds it. From a substantive law standpoint, this multiplication of judges is not necessarily unfortunate in so far as this pluralism of justice appropriately consecrates and nourishes legal sporting pluralism. With their normative case law actions, these judges and arbitrators take part by acting alone or sometimes within a constructive dialogue, to an appropriate and consistent regulation of disputes relating to the professional activity of those involved in sport. This takes into account the peculiarities of the organisation of sport and the legal relationships established by these actors.Whereby, ultimately, the relationships between legal pluralism and pluralism of justice are part of a general settlement of federal sporting disputes and working disputes that generally conform to the basic principles of fair justice and appearing resolutely adapted to the specificities of professional sporting activity. Does this not illustrate an “ordered pluralism ?