Legal pluralism, social theory, and the state

Abstract

Legal pluralism has seen a marked rise in interest since the turn of the century. While long rejected in legal studies, legal pluralism is now widely accepted, not least in light of the broad range of perspectives on the state it has sought to interpret and it has produced. A crucial change could be noted in the 1970s, when legal anthropologists began to demonstrate the applicability of this term, and not just in anthropological thinking about law. Political and economic developments also profoundly changed constellations of legal pluralism, following diverse trajectories in which the concept obtained multiple meanings. While highlighting significant stages of this process, this chapter discusses how anthropological insights in law and legal pluralism metamorphosed from the study of law in colonial societies towards law of a widely varying scope under conditions of ever-increasing global connectedness. The epistemological insights drawn from the diverse trajectories reflect and shape the social theories of the time, where intersections of state and law represent a central theme, albeit to a greater extent in some periods, and virtually absent in others.

The Case of Piruani: Contested Justice, Legal Pluralism, and Indigeneity in Highland Bolivia

“…This conflict occurred in part because the constitution treats Indigenous communities as internally homogenous, and assumes there exist clearly distinguishable nonstate legal or normative orders that can be afforded recognition (Goodale 2019). This is similar to academic conceptions of legal pluralism in which normative orders are believed to map neatly onto discrete internally homogenous groups or communities and operate as systems of institutionalized social rules (Benda‐Beckmann and Turner 2019; Tamanha 2007). However, Indigenous communities are not bounded entities and may contain multiple interpenetrating normative orders that can result in the blending of legal norms, practices, and logics known as interlegality (Hoekema 2005; Santos and Exeni 2012).…”

“…There exists a longstanding debate concerning whether the recognition of plurality in state law constitutes genuine legal pluralism or merely a weak version that privileges the centrality of the state as the ultimate source of normativity (Benda‐Beckman and Turner 2019; Sani 2020). Yet the Bolivian constitution recognizes state and nonstate law as structurally equal and independent sources of authority.…”

Typology of Village Governance Assessed Based on Sociological Perspective

“…Based on these provisions, all the lowest government units such as nagari in West Sumatra, Gampong in Aceh, Marga in South Sumatra, forest in North Sumatra, Kampung in Kalimantan and others, change their nomenclature to become villages. (Security, 2013) Village in terms of origin and type of village historical growth Based on the history of village growth, there are at least four types of villages in Indonesia, namely as follows: (Benda-Beckmann & Turner, 2018) 1. Traditional Village (self-governing community).…”

Policing-Mobilities in the Border-Stripe

“…However, different legal orders are invoked, negotiated and actualised when a centre decides whether to take on an informationrequest. It is therefore paramount not to stop at law-as-text but to focus on everyday practices in multiple local situations (Benda-Beckmann and Turner 2018). In doing so, we enhance understanding of the practices and processes through which negotiations between interacting legal orders take place and, in turn, how space is shaped through policing practices.…”

“…In particular anthropologist have argued that the formal legal system is but one possibility and other normative registers (customary law, religious law, etc.) have to be considered on equal footing, not needing the recognition of the State to be valid (Griffiths 2010;Benda-Beckmann and Turner 2018).…”