Actors, Institutions and Narratives. The Neo-Institutional Framework of Analysis

Abstract

This chapter describes the general theoretical background of the study “Narrating the Rule of Law”, which builds on approaches and findings from political science, history, sociology and cultural studies. The point of departure is the neo-institutionalist assumption that existing orders influence actors’ behaviour, but that actors can also use or try to modify these orders according to their interests or normative ideas. They do so by using, constructing and circulating ideas and beliefs through discourse. We further assume that the specific context matters for how politicians refer to the rule of law. In this chapter, we apply the general analytical framework to trace the history of the liberal rule of law and illustrate some ‘classical’ conflicts surrounding its meaning and development, including the essential role of politicians (and judges) in this process. We develop these considerations and discuss why national and temporal differences in the rule of law narratives are conceivable. Finally, we discuss potential conflicts and narratives that may arise from party competition, the government–opposition divide and differing rationale of politicians’ and judges’ views of the rule of law.