Interpretation of law is partially regulated by law. In Central Europe there are norms regulating the interpretation scattered in the introductory parts of codexes. In Anglo-Saxon tradition there are special law interpretation acts. There are conceptual differences in the regulation of law interpretation between these legal cultures. There is internal tension between legal regulation of law interpretation and its character of creative intellectual activity. Due to this tension the interpretation of law has to be interpreted restrictively. It binds only interpretation in the framework of the process of realisation of law but not the so called doctrinal interpretation.
Legal pluralism is a standard element of postmodern vocabulary in legal theory. It is possible to find predecessors of legal pluralism in legal history, but only when we look at it with the eyes of today. It forms a part of broad normative pluralism and is usually connected with important changes in the concept of law. There are different kinds or models of legal pluralism in particular societies, but some kind of it is present almost everywhere. Legal pluralism exists today in the context of postmodern situation, and it is caused by different factors especially by power pluralism and cultural diversity.
The theory of sociological imagination formulated by Ch. W. Mills (different from legal imagination) is useful for legal science, law making and interpretation of law. Some traditional concepts of legal science are better apprehended in the framework of relations between the worlds of power institutions and „Lebenswelt“ of a human. (e. g. public/private law, law/right). It is useful in study of human rights and the civilisation mission of law.
This text is a continuation of the author’s previous article published in the preceding fascicles of Právny obzor. An interesting concept of polycentric legal system has been formed in Central Europe. We understand it as a complementary to the concept of legal pluralism: polycentric legal system of state in the framework of legal systems connected with other subjects of public power. Legal pluralism is becoming the central concept of postmodern in law. The impact of legal pluralism on the situation of individual human being is predominantly negative, because her/his legal situation is becoming more complicated, fragmented and changing, but it is important for the functioning of law in postmodern situation.
The basic idea of this paper reads that legal pluralism leads to changes in the legal methodology consisting of three parts: 1. methodology of law-making, 2. methodology of implementation of law including interpretation, 3. methodology of legal science (jurisprudence). In the process of law-making other legal systems operative on the same territory are already taken into account. Different legal systems have partially different canons of interpretation, and so in the situation of legal pluralism when it is necessary to apply rules belonging to more than one legal system, there are new challenges for traditional methods of interpretation. Jurisprudence is confronted with the task to conceptualise simultaneous operation of different legal systems on the systems on the same territory and different concepts (definitions) of law and to accommodate its methods to the changes in the subject of study.
Legal regulation of interpretation of law is a strange part of legal order, and so even the confrontation of the law of interpretation with traditional parts and concepts of legal theory ensues in sometimes surprising results. Law of interpretation consists of secondary rules, but legal regulation of interpretation of law is not the regulation of some primary rules, but it regulates handling these rules by interpreters. It regulates the interpretation of specific normative texts. The position of interpreted law resembles the situation of the facts in standard legal regulation. Law of interpretation narrows the accepted possibilities of interpretation to support the regulative function of law. Interpretation and ensuing understanding of text is the field of hermeneutics. There are strong moments of circularity in law of interpretation and it resembles the theory of autopoietic systems. Authentic interpretation and legal definitions are separate problems of the law of interpretation. There is a tension between law of interpretation and the concept of separation of powers.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.