-
ESQUIROL ARTICLE.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) 1/13/2014 4:47 PM
145
Legal Latin Americanism
Jorge L. Esquirol
I. INTRODUCTION
LegalscholarsfromLatinAmericaareincreasinglypublishing,presentingatconferencesandparticipatinginlegaldebatesintheU.S.aswellasinLatinAmerica.Thisrelativelynewdevelopmentiseffectivelychanginglegalareastudiesfocusedontheregion.
It isenlargingthefieldwithmoreparticipants andpotentially
alternative approaches.Whereas itmayhavebeen possible in the past
for Latin Americanist legal scholars in
NorthAmericatoaddressthemselvessolelytoahomeaudience,suchisnolongerplausibly
the case. Legal area studies specialists are quickly confrontedwith
the reactions and impact of their engagement in the
placeswrittenabout.Inaddition,withmoretranslationsofacademicworksandscholarsworkinginmultiplelanguages,venues,andpublications,theirprofessionalproductionisquicklysharedfromoneforumtoanother.
Yet, there are significantdifferencesbetween
legalLatinAmericanismandlegaldiscourseinLatinAmerica.LegalLatinAmericanism,inthesenseusedhere,istheacademicandprofessionalpracticeofwritingaboutlawinLatinAmericafromanexternalperspective.Itscharacteristicfeatureisnotthephysicallocationoftheauthor,butratheradistinctepistemology.MostofthisliteratureisproducedinNorthAmerica,inEnglish,foraudiencesinthe
globalNorth.By contrast, legaldiscourse inLatinAmerica, again
asusedhere, refers to thevast arrayof academic and societaldebate
aboutlawinspecificnationallegalcommunitiesinLatinAmerica.Distinguishedinthisway,writingaboutLatinAmericanlawinEnglishinNorthAmericaandengaginginspecificlegaldebatesinaparticularLatinAmericanlocationcantakeverydifferentforms.Additionally,thelegalpoliticsinoneforummaybequiteunliketheother.And,whileLatinAmericanlegalstudiesisa
fieldunto itself in theglobalNorth, thesamecannotbesaid for
legaldiscourse acrossLatinAmerica as awhole. Specific locales
ordiscursivecommunities may have their own conventions,
authoritative
references,shorthands,andinterpretationsofsourcesandevents.Still,despiteabroadrangeof
localvariation,aprimarydividecanbetracedbetween
legaldiscourseaboutLatinAmericaprincipallygenerated in
theU.S.andEurope,andlegaldiscourseinspecificLatinAmericancountries.
-
ESQUIROL ARTICLE.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) DAVID
146 YALE HUMAN RIGHTS & DEVELOPMENT L.J. Symposium
Indeed,themodesof intervening in legaldebates
inthecentermaybequitedifferent than legaldiscourseat thenational
level.Thiscertainly
includesdifferencesovertherelevanceandemphasisoftopicsdebated.But,more
importantly, it concernswhat is considered convincing
argumentation,credibletheoreticalframeworks,andthedisciplinesorfieldsdominantwithin
legal debates. Due to the differences in these distinct
discursiveeconomies,an intervention inthe
legalpoliticalarenaatthenational levelmaynoteasilytranslate
intodiscussionsatthecenter.Alternatively,LatinAmericanistframeworksanddebatesmayonlyobliquelyengagewithlegaldiscourse
at the national level.While the two fields of contestationmayshare
a common legal thread, and presumably the same object of
study,theyarenotablynotthesame.Duetotheparticularityofdistinctinterpretivecommunities,eachexhibitsitsownepistemologicalcommitments,analyticalconventions,andpoliticalarena.
Indeed,untilrecently,suchdifferences have made transparent exchange
between legal actors in
LatinAmericaandlegalLatinAmericanistsquitelimited.
Furthermore, these twodistinct
fieldshavequitedifferentgeopoliticalimpact.They clearly involve
twodifferentalthoughnotmutuallyexclusiveaudiences.LatinAmericanists
areprincipally involved in
academicandpoliticalcirclesintheglobalNorth.LegalscholarshipinLatinAmericaispredominantlysituatedinlegalcommunitieswithineachcountry.WhileLatinAmericanismmaysimplyappeartobethereflectivedescriptionandreproductionforforeignaudiencesoflegaldevelopmentsinLatinAmerica,it
actually responds to itsown conventions
andgenealogyofknowledgeproduction.Indeed,acasualobserverfromLatinAmericamaybetemptedtodismissLatinAmericanism
as, atbest, a secondhand accountof
legaleventsintheregion.Amorecriticalperspectivemayevenhighlightitserroneous,warped,or
fantasizedquality, insomecases.And, indeed,
theremaybeanumberofareasinwhichLatinAmericanistshavesimplygottenitwrong,emphasizedthewrongpoints,oreveninstrumentallymischaracterizedthesituation.
Regardless,writinginthecenteraboutLatinAmericanlawinEnglishhas,inmanyrespects,agreaterimpactonlocallawandlegalinstitutionsinLatinAmericathandoeslocallegalscholarship.ItisthistransnationalfieldthatinformsU.S.foreignpolicyonlawintheregion,includingaidforlegalandinstitutionalreform.Itisalsothesortofbackgroundanalysisthatgetstakenupby
internationalorganizations in the formationof
theirdevelopmentprograms, areasof assistance, and conditionson
loans. Indeed,
thedesignofinternationallysponsoredreformprogramsandpolicyconditionsareinterconnectedwiththesedebates.Additionally,LatinAmericaexpertsarefrequentlycalledtotestifyinU.S.courtsonthestateoflegalsystemsinspecificLatinAmericancountries.Thesesituationsarise
in
forumnonconveniensmotions,politicalasylumcases,U.S.enforcementofLatinAmericancourt
judgments,andothersuchsituations.Thebases for theseviewsare
-
ESQUIROL ARTICLE.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) DAVID
2013 Legal Latin Americanism 147
generatedandsupportedby the literatureon law inLatinAmerica in
thecenter,intheformofacademicscholarship,expertopinions,commissionedreports,projectevaluations,andthelike.
Thepresentessaybeginstoexplorethedistinctionbetweenthefieldsoflegal
LatinAmericanism and national legal discourse in
LatinAmericancountries.SectionIIbrieflyoutlinesthespecificityoflegaldiscourseinLatinAmericaat
thenational level.Partof
thisspecificityderives,nodoubt,fromdifferences in the legal
issuesmostprominent ineachcontext.Moreimportantly, though, is its
distinctiveness resulting from
epistemologicaldifferences,suchasdistincthistoriesof
jurisprudence,particularmodesofreadingauthoritativetexts,andcontextuallypersuasivetypesofargumentation.SectionIIIhighlightstheoverallcharacteristicsandrelevanceof
legal Latin Americanism, as produced mainly in the U.S. This field
ofknowledgedisproportionately trains legal realist insightson law
inLatinAmerica,whilemostlyacceptingliberallegalideologyintheglobalNorthatfacevalue.Thisproducesapersistentimageoflegalfailureintheregion,comparedtoanidealizedvisionofliberallawinthemoredevelopedcountries.Finally,SectionIVdescribessomeoftherecentdevelopmentsinthefieldoflegalLatinAmericanismandexaminestheprosandconsofsomeoftheseapproaches.II.
LEGAL DISCOURSE IN LATIN AMERICA
Thedifferencesbetween
legalLatinAmericanismatthecenterandnationallegaldiscourseinLatinAmericaaresignificant.Locallegalwritingisinthelocallanguageandmorefinelyfocused,inmostcases,onnationallegalquestions.Thisincludesthegamutofdiscussionsaboutlaw,legislativereform,judiciallydecidedcases,administrativeregulationandthelike.Itisproducedbothwithinandoutsideof
formal institutions. Insomecases,
itrevolvesaroundtheopinionsofhighlyregarded juristsandthe
judiciary.1Inother cases, it involvesargumentsandexplanations in
legal
textbooks,expertcommentary,andthepress.2Inbrief,locallegaldiscourseisahighlyimportantandoftenundervalueddimensionofthelegalsystem.Onecanperceive
itasaninformal legal institution.
Itgeneratessocietalengagementanddebateovernationallegalarrangements.
Ofcourse,locallegaldiscourseinLatinAmericaisalsowiderthanthat.Itcanextendtophilosophicaldebates,internationallaw,andthelike.Additionally,thereissignificanttransnationalexchangeinmostcountriesofthe
1.SeegenerallyJOHNHENRYMERRYMAN&ROGELIOPREZPERDOMO,THECIVILLAWTRADITION:ANINTRODUCTIONTOTHELEGALSYSTEMSOFEUROPEANDLATINAMERICA57,60(2007).2.See,e.g.,IsabelC.Jaramillo,TheSocialApproachtoFamilyLaw:ConclusionsfromtheCanonicalFamilyLawTreatisesofLatinAmerica,58AM.J.COMP.L.843(2010).
-
ESQUIROL ARTICLE.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) DAVID
148 YALE HUMAN RIGHTS & DEVELOPMENT L.J. Symposium
region.3AmainexampleisLatinAmericashistoricalrelationtoEuropeanlegalsources,authoritiesanddevelopments.4Additionally,specificsubjectareasormethodologicalandpoliticalaffinitygroupscrossbordersinsignificantways.Dezelay
andGarthhavedemonstrated that increased
contactwithU.S.lawschoolsandlegalscholarshasbeentranslatedintocloutandinfluencebyLatinAmericanlegalactorsintheirhomecontexts.5Thishasalsobeenamodefor
increasedSouthSouthexchange,possiblytriangulatedwithU.S.orforeignassistance.6Alas,thisisnottheplacetoexploreinanygreatdetail
theparticularitiesof local legaldiscourse
inspecificLatinAmericanlegalcommunities.
Still,locallegaldiscourseintheaggregatemaybeseenasquitedistinctfromlegalLatinAmericanism.Thisdifferencedoesnotmeanthatthetwofields
never connect. In fact, as noted already, the preponderant
geopoliticalpoweroflegalLatinAmericanismhasverydirectandsubstantialeffectson
law and legal institutions inLatinAmerica.For
themostpart,though,itisarticulatedasadiscourseofpolicyandsocialscience,externalto
juristic legaldebate.7Still,
ithasunderwrittenbroadscaledevelopmentprojects,theredesignofnational
institutions,andeffortstotransformthelocallegalculture.Ithasnot,however,significantlyengagedwiththesubstanceofmainstreamlocallegaldebateinparticularLatinAmericancountries.However,as
is thepremiseof thisessay,withmoreLatinAmericabased
legalscholarsparticipating inLatinAmericanist legaldebate in
thecenter, this is likely to change. It remains to be seen,
however, inwhichways different local legal debates may be
transformed through such increasing interaction, especially as
relates to dominant conceptual
frameworks,thedisciplinesemphasized,andtheactualsubstanceofdebates.III.
LATIN AMERICAN LEGAL STUDIES
The fieldofLatinAmerican legal studiesproper is a relatively
recentdevelopment.8 Its origins are inseparable from the
lawanddevelopment
3.SeegenerallyAlejandroGarro,ShapingtheContentofaBasicCourseonLatinAmericanLegalSystems,19U.MIAMIINTERAM.L.REV.595(1988).4.SeeRENDAVID&J.E.BRIERLY,MAJORLEGALSYSTEMSINTHEWORLDTODAY(1985);PHANORJ.EDER,ACOMPARATIVESTUDYOFANGLOAMERICANANDLATINAMERICANLAW4(1950);MERRYMAN&PREZPERDOMO,supranote1;DIEGOLPEZMEDINA,LATEORAIMPURADELDERECHO:LATRANSFORMACINDELACULTURAJURDICALATINOAMERICANA(2004):JorgeL.Esquirol,TheFictionsofLatinAmericanLaw(PartI),1997UTAHL.REV.425(1997).5.YVESDEZELAY&BRYANTGARTH,THEINTERNATIONALIZATIONOFPALACEWARS(2007).6.SeeMximoLanger,RevolutioninLatinAmericanCriminalProcedure:DiffusionofLegalIdeasfromthePeriphery,54AM.J.COMP.L.617(2007).7.Ondifferentlegalinterpretivecommunities,seeWilliamS.Blatt,InterpretiveCommunities:TheMissingElementinStatutoryInterpretation,95NW.U.L.R.629(2001).8.ForhistoricalcontextonLatinAmericanstudiesingeneral,seeRichardM.Morse,TheStrangeCareerofLatinAmericanStudies,356ANNALSAM.ACAD.POL.&SOC.SCI.106(1964).
-
ESQUIROL ARTICLE.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) DAVID
2013 Legal Latin Americanism 149
projectsofthe1960sand1970s.9Assuch,themainframeworkforthistypeofintellectualworkhasbeentheefforttopromoteeconomicdevelopmentthrough
law.10Thismodel suffers from themany shortcomings
thathavebeenamplydiscussedinthelawanddevelopmentliteratureaswellastheliteraturecritiquingthatfield.11Inessence,ithasbecomeevidentthatthereisnoclearblueprint
forhow lawcanbealigned toproduceeitherdevelopmentordemocracy.
Scholarshavenotedthreeseparatephasesofthelawanddevelopmentmovement:theinitialsocialdemocraticvarietyofthe1960sand1970s,theneoliberalversionof
the1980sand1990s,and
themorerecentchastenedneoliberalismcumsocialjusticerhetoricoftheearlytwentyfirstcentury.12Though
thepolicyprescriptions changedover time,
theunderlyingparadigmforLatinAmerican
legalstudiesremainedthesame.Itstoodtoreason that if development and
democracy were lacking, and law was assumed to have something to do
with it, then there must be
somethingseriouslywrongwithLatinAmerican law.Essentially, it aimed
lawandsociety type critiques on the regions national legal
systems.13Moreover,thisbodyoftransnationalwriting,overall,repeatedlysuggeststheconclusionthatLatinAmericanlawisafailedversionofWesternliberallaw.14
Bycontrast,averydifferentparadigmforlegalstudiesrelatedtoLatinAmericahasbeentheEuropeannessapproach.15IntermsofU.S.writing,thisisarelativelymarginalstream.ItisfilledbytheranksofclassicalcomparativistswhogroupLatinAmerica
togetherwithEurope.16 In termsofengagementwith juristicdiscourse in
specificLatinAmerican locales,
theEuropeannessstreamhaspotentiallyamuchgreaterconnection.Indeed,itsmainpointonnationallawinLatinAmericaisthecloserelationtoitsEuropeansources.However,muchofthiscomparativelawwritingtypically
9.SeegenerallyKennethKarst,TeachingLatinAmericanLaw,19AM.J.COMP.L.685(1971);JorgeL.Esquirol,WritingtheLawofLatinAmerica,40GEO.WASH.INTLL.REV.693(2009).10.SeegenerallyThomasM.Franck,TheNewDevelopment:CanAmericanLawandlegalInstitutionsHelpDevelopingCountries?1972WIS.L.REV.767(1972);LawrenceM.Friedman,OnLegalDevelopment,24RUTGERSL.REV.11(1969).11.SeeJAMESGARDNER,LEGALIMPERIALISM:AMERICANLAWYERSANDFOREIGNAIDINLATINAMERICA(1980);DavidTrubek&MarcGalanter,ScholarsinSelfEstrangement:SomeReflectionsontheCrisisinLawandDevelopmentStudiesintheUnitedStates,1974WIS.L.REV.1062(1974);THOMASCAROTHERS,THEMANYAGENDASOFTHERULEOFLAWREFORMINLATINAMERICA,INRULEOFLAWINLATINAMERICA:THEINTERNATIONALPROMOTIONOFJUDICIALREFORM(PilarDomingo&RachelSiedereds.,2001);BrianTamanaha,ThePrimacyofSocietyandtheFailureofLawandDevelopment,44CORNELLINTLL.J.209(2011).12.DavidTrubek&AlvaroSantos,Introduction:TheThirdMovementinLawandDevelopmentTheoryandtheEmergenceofaNewCriticalPractice,inTHENEWLAWANDECONOMICDEVELOPMENT1,59(DavidTrubek&AlvaroSantoseds.,2006).13.JohnHenryMerryman,ComparativeLawandSocialChange:OntheOrigins,Style,DeclineandRevivaloftheLawandDevelopmentMovement,25AM.J.COMP.L.457(1977).14.JorgeL.Esquirol,TheFailedLawofLatinAmerica,56AM.J.COMP.L.75(2008).15.MERRYMAN&PREZPERDOMO,supranote1,at57,60.16.MERRYMAN&PREZPERDOMO,supranote1;seealsoEsquirol,supranote4.
-
ESQUIROL ARTICLE.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) DAVID
150 YALE HUMAN RIGHTS & DEVELOPMENT L.J. Symposium
onlyaddsa fewexamples fromLatinAmerica
toworksprincipallyaboutcivillawsystemsinEurope.Theviewitperpetuatesaboutlawintheregionis,
in fact, that it is simply a secondrate copy
ofEuropeanmodels.17Assuch,thisscholarshipdownplaystheimportanceorinterestofengagingthelaw
inLatinAmerica. Itwould be better andmore enlightening, so
thisthinkinggoes,tostudytheoriginalEuropeansources.
Notably,theEuropeannessapproachtoLatinAmericacontributestotheconstructionandmaintenanceofaparticularformoflegalideology.ItfurtherjustifiesLatinAmericansinbelievingthattheirlawandlegalpracticesarepartofatransnational,Europeanpractice.18Inbroadstrokes,itassistsinlegitimating
the legalsystemoverall,evenat theexpenseofLatinAmericans being
labeled unoriginal imitators. Additionally, lawanddevelopment
practitioners incorporated this Europeanness strain
ofcomparativescholarshipintotheirthinking.Itfiguresasanotheroneoftheelementsofthelegalfailurediagnosis.19LawsqualityinLatinAmericaasacopy,borrowed
fromother societies,and
frommodelsnotgenerallyconsideredidealeitheraddstothelawanddevelopmentdiagnosisofdysfunctionwhichisbelievedtoleadtobadeconomiesandlimiteddemocracies.
Finally,thedominantformsoflegalLatinAmericanismhavealsosignificantly
influenced thesocialsciencesconcernedwith law.Thus,
forexample,theexpansivelegalpluralismliteraturealsoindirectlyadoptsthegappremise,i.e.thenotionthatthereisanexceptionalgapbetweenlawandsocietyinLatinAmerica.20Thistypeofworkisusuallyconsideredquitedifferent
from development scholarship.21 However, it draws on the
samebackground understanding of law in the region.22 The effect,
for
mostcommentators,istosidelinestatelawaltogether.Alternativelegalordersclosertosocietybecomethecentralfocusand,itcommonlyfollows,leadtocallsfortheirequalstandingwith,oroutrightreplacementof,formalstatelaw.PrimaryexamplesareindigenouspeopleslawandtheinterAmericanhumanrightsregime.23Adifferentbutrelatedexample
is themorerecentjudicializationofpolitics literature.24This
latterscholarship isprimarily
17.SeeGarro,supranote3.18.MEDINA,supranote4.19.Esquirol,supranote15.20.BOAVENTURADESOUZASANTOS,ESTADO,DERECHO,YLUCHASSOCIALES(1991);RAQUELYRIGOYENFAJARDO,PAUTASDECOORDINACINENTREELDERECHOINDGENAYELDERECHOESTATAL(1999).21.SeealsoMAURICIOGARCAVILLEGAS,LAEFICACIASIMBLICADELDERECHO(1993)22.MULTICULTURALISMINLATINAMERICA:INDIGENOUSRIGHTS,DIVERSITYANDDEMOCRACY(RachelSiedered.,2002).23.See,e.g.,LillianAponteMiranda,UploadingtheLocal:AssessingtheContemporaryRelationshipbetweenIndigenousPeoplesLandTenureSystemsandInternationalHumanRightsLawRegardingtheAllocationofTraditionalLandsandResourcesinLatinAmerica,10OREGONR.INTLL.419(2008).24.LINNA.HAMMERGREN,THEPOLITICSOFJUSTICEANDJUSTICEREFORMINLATINAMERICA:THEPERUVIANCASEINCOMPARATIVEPERSPECTIVE(1998);WILLIAMC.PRILLAMAN,THE
-
ESQUIROL ARTICLE.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) DAVID
2013 Legal Latin Americanism 151
produced bypolitical scientists and legal scholarsworkingwith
them. Itcapitalizes on the recent expansion of constitutional
courts and
constitutionaljurisdictioninLatinAmerica.25Theseworksgenerallytrackhowpolicydecisionsandpoliticsthatwerepreviouslythedomainofotherbranches
of government are now being transacted in the courts. This
literaturepredominantlyviewslocallegaldiscourse,ifanything,asposthocrationalizations
forprevailingpolitical interests.The realmeaning, following
thislineofthinking,istobediscoveredinthebackgroundorderthatproducesthesedecisions.
A. The Dominant Forms
Themain literatureinthefieldofLatinAmerican
legalstudiesinEnglish,andprincipally in theU.S.,has thus
takenoneorbothof these
twodominantforms:(1)itdevaluesformallawasirrelevant
inthefaceofdifferentandmoredeterminativesocial factors;and
(2)official law isexamined throughan ideological lens searching
fordysfunction,under theassumption that Latin American law has
played a key role in producingeconomic underdevelopment and weak
democracies. 26 Indeed, much ofthis work generally follows in the
lawandsociety or the lawanddevelopment
typeperspectives.27Whilemuchof thisscholarship
isquiteusefulandshedssignificantlightondevelopmentsinLatinAmerica,italsoleavesoutasignificantpartofthepicture.Indeed,thisomissionoftenleadstoadisappointinglypredictableconceptionoflegalfailureinLatinAmerica.
Commontobothofthesemainapproachesisthattheyignoretheconstitutive
politics of local legal debate. This is not to say that law in
LatinAmerica is insufficiently understood as political. In fact,
official law is
JUDICIARYANDDEMOCRATICDECAYINLATINAMERICA:DECLININGCONFIDENCEINTHERULEOFLAW(2000);THEJUDICIALIZATIONOFPOLITICSINLATINAMERICA(RachelSiederetal.eds.,2005);CULTURESOFLEGALITY:JUDICIALIZATIONANDPOLITICALACTIVISMINLATINAMERICA(JavierCousoetal.eds.,2010);GRETCHENHELMKE&JULIOROSFIGUEROA,COURTSINLATINAMERICA(2011).25.See,e.g.,THEJUDICIALIZATIONOFPOLITICSINLATINAMERICA(RachelSiederetal.eds.,2005);GRETCHENHELMKE&JULIOROSFIGUEROA,COURTSINLATINAMERICA(2011);CULTURESOFLEGALITY:JUDICIALIZATIONANDPOLITICALACTIVISMINLATINAMERICA(JavierCousoetal.eds.,2010).26.See,e.g.,KENNETHKARST&KEITHROSENN,LAWANDDEVELOPMENTINLATINAMERICA:ACASEBOOK(1975);KeithRosenn,TheJeito:BrazilsInstitutionalBypassoftheFormalLegalSystemanditsDevelopmentalImplications,19AM.J.COMP.L514(1971);KennethL.Karst,RightsinLandandHousinginanInformalLegalSystem:TheBarriosofCaracas,19AM.J.COMP.L550(1971);JosephThome,Elderechocomoinstrumentodecambiosocial:Comentariossobreunmodelodederechoydesarrollo,12BOLETNDELINSTITUTODEDOCENCIAEINVESTIGACINJURDICA(Chile,May1972).27.SeegenerallyJohnHenryMerryman,supranote13,atApp.A;DavidM.Trubek,BacktotheFuture:TheShort,HappyLifeoftheLawandSocietyMovement,18FLA.ST.U.L.REV.1(1991);BrianTamanaha,TheLessonsofLawandDevelopmentStudies,89AM.J.INTLL.470(1995);Esquirol,supranote9.
-
ESQUIROL ARTICLE.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) DAVID
152 YALE HUMAN RIGHTS & DEVELOPMENT L.J. Symposium
widelyperceivedasnothingbutbadfaithrationalizationsofdominantpoliticalinterests.28Bycontrast,thepointhereisthatthewaylegaldiscourseisstructuredalsomatters.Viewsonthenatureoflaw,standardargumentativeconventions,thelevelofpersuasiveabstraction,commonunderstandings
of specific concepts and references, and the general consensus
oncommonsensicalreasoningallshapethetypeandslantoflegalpolitics.
Thereareanumberofreasonswhythislatterlineofinquirytendstobequickly
truncatedwhen turning toLatinAmerica.Analysisoften
endsattheobservationthatstatelawintheregionpenetratesimperfectlythroughoutallofsocietyorthatlawismainlyagamefortherichandtheelite.29Infact,alloflegalliberalismselusiveobjectivessuchasdecisionalneutrality,
legal objectivity, equal applicationof the laws, judicial
independence,andthelikehavebeenrepeatedlyfoundlackinginLatinAmerica.30Theseconclusionsessentiallyencapsulatethesumoftheliteratureontheregion.Indeed,theverytermLatinAmericanLawasgivencontentbycomparative
legal studies, the social sciences,andultimatelypopular
referencereflectstheskewedunderstandingsproducedbylegalLatinAmericanism.Thesametermcouldpotentiallybeused,bycontrast,tosimplycapturethesum
of contemporaneousdevelopments or similar features inmore
thanoneLatinAmericancountry.31 Inreality, though, ithasacquired
themorelimited,dominantunderstandingdescribedabove. Itsuse
chieflydenotestheultimatemeaningsproducedbylegalLatinAmericanismlawsirrelevanceanddysfunction.32
However,critiquesofirrelevanceordysfunctioncanbeapplied,insomedegree,toanysystemofliberallaw.33Moreover,theyarenotsufficientreasonstodenytheimportanceofstatelaw,locallegalanalysis,andnationallegaldiscourse.Infact,itisaseriousomissioninourunderstandingofthestakesinLatinAmericanlegalsystems.Itshouldbenotedthatthisdoesnotmeanthatinformationaboutothersocialsystems,legalpluralism,andthepoliticalcontextoflawarenotimportantendeavors.34ButinthecaseofLat
28.Seee.g.STEPHENHABERETAL.,THEPOLITICSOFPROPERTYRIGHTS:POLITICALINSTABILITY,CREDIBLECOMMITMENTS,ANDECONOMICGROWTHINMEXICO,18761929(2003);seegenerally,THE(UN)RULEOFLAWANDTHEUNDERPRIVILEGEDINLATINAMERICA(JuanE.Mendezetal.eds.,1999).29.Seee.g.JohnLinarelli,AngloAmericanJurisprudenceandLatinAmerica,20FORDHAMINTLL.J.50(1996).30.Seee.g.KeithRosenn,TheSuccessofConstitutionalismintheU.S.anditsFailureinLatinAmerica:AnExplanation,22U.MIAMIINTERAM.L.REV.1(1990);seegenerallyDanielBrinks,JudicialReformandIndependenceinBrazilandArgentina:ThebeginningofaNewMillennium?40TEX.INTLL.J.595(2005).31.ANGELOQUENDO,LATINAMERICANLAW(2006).32.SeeJorgeEsquirol,HaciadndevaLatinoAmerica?in,DERECHOYSOCIEDADENAMERICALATINA:UNDEBATESOBRELOSESTUDIOSJURDICOSCRTICOS(M.GarciaVillegas&C.RodriguezGaravito,eds.2003).33.See,e.g.,BRIANTAMANAHA,ONTHERULEOFLAW:HISTORY,POLITICS,THEORY(2004).34.SeeTamanaha,supranote11.
-
ESQUIROL ARTICLE.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) DAVID
2013 Legal Latin Americanism 153
inAmerican legal studies, thesehavebeen emphasizedat
theexpenseofmuchifanyanalyticalworkontheofficiallaw.Indeed,LatinAmericanlegalstudieshasbeennotablylimitedinitsrepertoireofintellectualtools.Forthemostpart,itsmajorinsightasafieldisthatthereiswidegapbetweenlaw
in thebooksandlaw inaction inLatinAmerica.35The failure
tomeetpolicygoalssatisfactorilyasevidencedbythiswellnotedgaphasbeenthesinglemostimportantdriveroflegalcommentaryontheregion.
B. Rationale for Development Reform
Furthermore, much Latin Americanist legal scholarship directly
supportslawanddevelopmentprojectsofreform.ItpavesthewayfortherejectionandreplacementofentireareasoflawinLatinAmerica.Initsplace,alternativemodelsaremoreeasilyintroduced.Thesemay,insomecases,beframedasmoredirectlyconnectedtosociety.AgoodexampleisHernandode
Sotos efforts, widely supported by the World Bank and the
InterAmericanBank forDevelopment, to formalizevarious
informalsectorsoftheeconomy,whichsimplyamountsto,inessence,anargumentinfavorofderegulation.36
Forhim, the state should formalize anduniversalize
thedefactomodeloftheinformaleconomy,closertothepeopleorinformalsashecallsthem.
Inhistheoreticalanalysis, deSotocondemnsthestatesformal lawas
impedingeconomicdevelopment. Instead,he lauds the
informalsectorasafontofentrepreneurshipandlockedupwealth.However,
these informal sectors are nothing other than lax regulatory
environmentsproducedbyofficial toleranceof
legalnoncompliance,whetherornotoneagreeswiththeunderlyingsituationofnonenforcement.Elevatingtheinformalassomehowmoreauthentictolocalpeople,however,simplyclothestheargumentforderegulationinthenarrativeofaculturalgapbetweenlawandsociety.
Inturn,thedevelopmentrelateddiagnosisoflawsfailureiscommonlyfollowedbyadvocacy
forsimplyadifferent liberal legalmodel.Thus, forexample, the
criminal lawprocedure throughoutLatinAmericahasbeencomprehensively
transformed through the introductionof
theadversarialsystem.37Allpriorcriminalproceduresystems,regardlessoftheirvariationacross
the region,wereeffectivelycharacterized,
inablanketlikeway,asundemocratic,inefficientandinquisitorialwithall
theconnotationsthat these terms imply, and then convincingly
rejected and
replacedwholesale.38Whetherthecountryinquestionfacedsuchdifferentproblems
35.SeeMATTHEWMIROW,LATINAMERICANLAW:AHISTORYOFPRIVATELAWANDINSTITUTIONSINSPANISHAMERICA(2004)36.HERNANDODESOTO,THEMYSTERYOFCAPITAL(1968).37.Langer,supranote6.38.SeegenerallyMichaelR.Paul,Wanted:CriminalJusticeColombiasAdoptionofaProsecutorialSystemofCriminalProcedure,16FORDHAMINTLL.J.608(199293);CarlosRodrigodelaBarra
-
ESQUIROL ARTICLE.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) DAVID
154 YALE HUMAN RIGHTS & DEVELOPMENT L.J. Symposium
aseitherinsufficientcriminalenforcementor,ontheotherendofthespectrum,insufficientregardfordefendantsrights,thesolutionwasthesame:theadoptionof
theadversarialmodelpromotedbyUnitedStatesAgencyforInternationalDevelopment.
It isuseful to recall that legalLatinAmericanism
isnotdependentonthenationalityof theexpositoror thephysical
location
fromwhereheorshewrites.Indeed,inthetwoexamplesabove,bothcanbeclaimedasprojectschampionedbylegalscholarsfromLatinAmerica.HernandodeSotoworksfromPeru,closelytiedtolocalissues,althoughhisinspirationisselfprofessedlytracedtolegaldevelopmentsinEurope.Additionally,theintellectual
leadersof theswitch toadversarialcriminalprocedure
throughoutLatinAmericahavebeenconvincinglyshownbyMximoLangertobeArgentineans.39Thus,rather
thananyrequiredauthenticityor locationalfactors, legal Latin
Americanism as described here is best understood as
acombinationofaconceptualframeworkbasedonWesternliberallegalideology,a
setofanalytical techniques, certaindominant ideasabout law
intheregion,anditsaudienceprincipallyintheglobalNorth.
C. Impact of Latin American Legal Studies in Latin America
Asnoted above, itmayhavebeenpossible in thepast for
legalLatinAmericanists,locatedintheglobalNorth,tothinkoftheiraudiencesaslimitedtotheirhomecontexts.40Becauseoflanguagedifferences,separateacademiccircuits,andmorelimitedcommunications,itcouldbethatonlythisaudienceappearedtoberelevant.Anauthorhadtoappealtoandconvincethisreferencegroup,andhadtopresentthematerialinawaywhichwouldmakesensetothem,wouldfitwithinacceptedintellectualparadigms,andexpress
acceptable political interests (albeit in a veiled way). What
waswrittenaboutLatinAmericamayhavenotbeenconsciouslyconsideredintermsofhow
the text intersectedwith the regionsown legal
intellectualtraditionsandparadigmsorhowitimpactedcertaingroupsorindividualswithinthatcommunity.
Ofcourse,evenifourerstwhileLatinAmericanistsnevercontemplatedtheirowncontributiontonationalorinternationallegalpolitics,theirworkcanstillbeanalyzedforitsimpactonthoseareas.41Insomecases,itseffectsmightevenbequitesubstantial.Inthecenter,ithelpsformtheopinionswehaveaboutthestudiedgroup.Itmighteveninfluenceweightydecisionsofforeignpolicy,internationalinstitutions,andtheproductionofknowledge.
Cousio,Adversarialvs.InquisitorialSystems:TheRuleofLawandProspectsforCriminalProcedureReforminChile,5SW.J.L.&TRADEAM.323(1998).39.Langer,supranote6.40.SeegenerallyRobertMorse,supranote8.41.SeegenerallyDAVIDKENNEDY,THEDARKSIDESOFVIRTUE:REASSESSINGINTERNATIONALHUMANITARIANISM(2004).
-
ESQUIROL ARTICLE.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) DAVID
2013 Legal Latin Americanism 155
Inaddition,itmayinfluencetheselfperceptionofthestudiedgroup.Opinions
fromcentersofpowermay induceasortofselffulfilling
internalization.42The studiedmaycome to see themselves through
theeyesof theirobservers.
Additionally, the connection of Latin American legal studies to
legalpoliticsinspecificLatinAmericanstatessurelyvaries.Untilrecently,ithashad
little conscious impact on the class of jurists, at least asmany
havethemselvesreported.43Most legalscholars inLatinAmericahavebeen
insufficientlyawareof itsoperational reach,specifically in the
formof lawanddevelopmentprojectsasanorganizedeffort.It
isonlynowbeingassimilatedasa significantparadigmwithpastand
continuing concreteeffects.44 This is not to say that the legal
reforms advanced by lawanddevelopmenthad anegligible impact.45
Manyprojectshave been implementedthroughtheforceofsuch
lawanddevelopmentwritingsandperspectives.Theywere,forthemostpart,howevernotsignificantlymetabolized
through mainstream local legal discourse. They
predominantlyoperatedatthepoliticallevelandbeyondthestuffoffinegrainedlegaldebate.Asaresult,theimpactoflegaldevelopmentassistancewasmostlytobulldozecompetingpositionsthat
inonewayoranothersupportedexistinglawsorchangeswithinthem.Inthefaceoflawsradicalfailure,engaging
inmainstream legaldebate inLatinAmericanodoubtappearedfrom an
external perspective on local legaldiscourse such as
legalLatinAmericanismanditslawanddevelopmentstrainliketheproverbialrearrangingofdeckchairsontheTitanic.
Assuch, thefieldsofnational legalpolitics inLatinAmericaand
legalgeopolitics in thecenterhaveproceeded in somewhatdifferent
registers.Theirdifferences,tobesure,areamovingtarget,limitedonlybythechangingdynamicsofdiscourse.46Achallengeforprogressives
in
theseshiftingdiscursivecommunitiesisindeedproducinginterventionsthatadvancecollective
objectives across different epistemic locales. This presents
someuniquedifficulties.Beyondspecificintellectualcommitmentsanddemandsforcoherenceandconsistency,thereistheadditionalfactorofasignificantpower
differential between the two fields. Intervening in debates in
theglobalNorth inaway thatdoesnotsimplyreproduce
thishierarchymaymake itmoredifficult tobe included and tobeheard
there. That is, attempting towriteaboutLatinAmerica in
theglobalNorth inaway that
42.ANTONYANGHIE,IMPERIALISM,SOVEREIGNTY,ANDTHEMAKINGOFINTERNATIONALLAW52100(2006).43.SeeELDERECHOENAMRICALATINA(CesarRodriguezGaravitoed.,2012).44.OSCARVILHENAVIEIRAANDDIMITRIDIMOULIS,OESTADODODIREITOEODESAFIODODESENVOLVIMENTO(2011)45.SeegenerallyTHENEWLAWANDECONOMICDEVELOPMENT(DavidTrubek&AlvaroSantoseds.,2006).46.SeeWilliamS.Blatt,InterpretiveCommunities:TheMissingElementinStatutoryInterpretation,95NW.U.L.R.629(2001).
-
ESQUIROL ARTICLE.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) DAVID
156 YALE HUMAN RIGHTS & DEVELOPMENT L.J. Symposium
doesnotreinforcetheglobalhegemonyoftheNorth
isadifficultfeat,becausethefieldisstructuredthatway.Conversely,interveninginactualjuristicdebates
inLatinAmerica inaway thatdoesnotsimply transfer thehegemonyof
legalLatinAmericanismwholesale is alsoquitedifficult
toresist.47ThelatterenjoystheintellectualvalidationofatransnationalcommunityandlegalauthoritiesintheglobalNorth.
D. The Geo-Politics of Legal Latin Americanism
LegalLatinAmericanismhasshownitselftobe,onthewhole,theacademiccounterparttoU.S.andmainstreaminternationalpolicytowardLatinAmerica.Thishastranslatedforthemostpartintoeconomicandpoliticalreformismtocontainmoreradicalandrevolutionarychange.ItsmodeofoperationhasbeentodiagnoseLatinAmericanlegalsystemsandtointroducealternativemodels.Usually,however,
the levelofanalysis
isconductedatthesystemwidelevelwithexternaldiagnosesandcritiques.48Assuch,legalareastudiesoftheregionhaveapredominantlyinstitutionalfocus,whether
they relate to the 1960sdevelopmental stateor in the
1990sneoliberalversion.Thus,forexample,acentralquestionintheearlyperiodwasgetting
the right typeofadministrativeagenciesand law schools.
Intheneoliberalversion,itwastherighttypeofcourts,criminalprocedure,andpropertyandcontractrights.
At abasic level, legal area studies focuson law
inLatinAmerica.Assuch,theypurporttobeaboutthesamesubjectmatterasnationallegaldiscourse,
if at a level removed.Yet, considering the close
connectionwithlawanddevelopment, Latin American legal area studies
easily
assumedtheroleofdiagnosticianofnationallegalsystems.Thus,thefieldhasbeencloselytiedtotheinternationalpoliticalarenaofcompetinglegalmodels.49Inthiscontext,participants
inthefieldcompeteonthebasisofevermoreconvincing assertions of laws
breakdown in the region, frequently
followedbyalternative,preferablemodels for law reform. In
theaggregate,thistypeofwritinghasgeneratedanumberofbaselineperceptionsaboutlawintheregion.Asalreadynoted,themainpictureproducedisoneoftherecurrentfailureoflawandlegalinstitutionsintheregion.Thisgeneraldiagnosis
isnotonly theproductof faultyanalysisasdiscussedbelow; it
isalsoquiteusefultotheobjectiveofadvocatinglegalreforms.Onceexistinglegalarrangementsareconvincinglyshown
tohave failed,
introducingalternativelegalinstitutionscanbemoreeasilyachieved.Theelementsofthis
47.SeeELDERECHOENAMRICALATINA,supranote44..48.Onthedifferencebetweenexternalandinternalcritique,seeWilliamJosephSinger,ThePlayerandtheCards:NihilismandLegalTheory,94YALEL.J.1(1984).49.See,e.g.,JamesM.Cooper,CompetingLegalCulturesandLegalReform:TheBattleforChile,29MICH.J.INTLL.501(2008).
-
ESQUIROL ARTICLE.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) DAVID
2013 Legal Latin Americanism 157
failurediagnosis,however,aregenerallybased inwholeor inpart
byhighlighting the regions inadequacy in fulfilling liberal
legalismspracticallyunattainablemyths.
My critique of thediscourse ofLatinAmerican legal failurehas
beenpresentedinotherwork.50Forpurposeshere,however,itismoreimportanttonotethattheseimagesoffailurearenotmerelytheserendipitousprojectionof
legalacademics.Nodoubt, this is indeedonedimensionof
it.TheprojectionofthedarksideofliberallegalismontoLatinAmericacontrasted
to itssuccessfuloperation in theWest isquite
likelyanunconsciousprojectionoflegalacademicsintheWest.51ThisisaphenomenondescribedbyEdward
Said regarding how the Orientwas constructed out of thesuppressed
images and fantasies of theWest.52And, I have argued elsewhere,
thecommon imagesofLatinAmerican lawmirror
thegeneralcritiquesofliberallegalismintheWestoverthecourseofthetwentiethcentury.However,
theorientalizationofLatinAmerican law
isnotmerelyaproductofacademicfancy.Norcanitsimplybeascribedtoanunconsciousprojection
of our own suppressed knowledge about legal systems in theWest.
Thereisanactivedemandforthese
imagesanddiagnoses.Indeed,thehierarchicalorderingofdifferentnationallegalsystemshasalonghistory.Itisnotanewphenomenonorarecentobservation.Itrespondstoahostofdifferentobjectives.
InLatinAmerica, itcanbe tracedback to theearly formationof
independentstates.53TheformofinterventionthenbypowerfulstatesonbehalfoftheinterestsoftheirnationalslivingordoingbusinessinLatinAmericawasbasedontheinjusticesorperceivedinjusticessufferedintheseregions.54Earlyinthenineteenthcentury,directmilitaryordiplomaticinterventionwasunproblematicallythenormforredress.OnceLatinAmericanleadersgainedsometractionwithinternationallawargumentsagainsttheseincursions,interventionwasonlyadmittedatleastintheoryincaseswheretherehadbeenadenialofjustice.55Suchanassertioncouldtriggerdirect
interference in the sovereign affairs of Latin American states.
Ofcourse,ithadtobesupportedinsomeway.Repeatedaccountsofthemal
50.Esquirol,supranote15.51.See,e.g.,TeemuRuskola,LegalOrientalism,101MICH.L.REV.179,209(2002);LamaAbuOdeh,ThePoliticsof(Mis)Recognition:IslamicLawPedagogyinAmericanAcademia,52AM.J.COMP.L.789(2004).52.EDWARDSAID,ORIENTALISM(1979).53.SeeJorgeL.Esquirol,LatinAmerica,inTHEOXFORDHANDBOOKOFTHEHISTORYOFINTERNATIONALLAW553(BardoFassbenderetal.eds.,2012).54.Id.55.SeeLilianaObregon,TheColludingWorldsoftheLawyer,theScholar,andthePolicymaker:AViewofInternationalLawfromLatinAmerica,23WIS.INTLL.J.145(2005);ArnulfBeckerLorca,InternationalLawinLatinAmericaorLatinAmericanInternationalLaw?Rise,Fall,andRetrievalofaTraditionofLegalThinkingandPoliticalImagination,47HARV.INTLL.J.283(2006);JorgeL.Esquirol,AlejandroAlvarezsLatinAmericanLaw:AQuestionofIdentity,19LEIDENJ.INTLL.931,955(2006).
-
ESQUIROL ARTICLE.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) DAVID
158 YALE HUMAN RIGHTS & DEVELOPMENT L.J. Symposium
functioningandcorruptionofallLatinAmericancourtsandgovernmentsmadethisjustificationforinterventionmoreeasilyacceptable.
Theactivedemand fornegativeaccountsof law
inLatinAmericahasmanycontemporarysourcesaswell.Someofthemareevendisciplinesandapproachesgenerallyconsidered
topromotesocial
justicegoals.Themostemblematicnodoubtishumanrightsdiscourse.Manyoftheremediesprovidedataninternationalleveldependonquitenegativerenditionsofentiresegmentsoflawandlegalinstitutionsinindividualcountries.Forexample,politicalasylumclaimsbyindividualsinfirstworldcountriesoftendependoncountryreportsdescribingthegrossviolationsofhumanrightsandnationallegalsystemsincapableofaddressingthem.
Therearemanyotherintereststhatalsocallforthistypeofaccount.InanylawsuitconnectedtoaLatinAmericanjurisdictionbroughtintheUnitedStates,theplaintiffmighthavetodefendagainstanattempttotransferjurisdictionbypresentingevidencethatthe
legalsystem inthealternativeLatinAmerican forum lacks thecapacity
tohandle thecase.Claiming theimpossibilityofachieving justice
inLatinAmericawillguaranteethecaseremains in theUnited
States.Likewise, in actions for the enforcement
ofjudgmentsenteredbynationalcourtsinLatinAmerica,thejudgmentdebtormayclaimalackofdueprocess,corruption,incompetenceofthedeciding
court.Several significantmoney judgmentsagainstU.S.
corporations,fordoingenvironmentalandotherharminLatinAmerica,havebeenevadedinjustthisway.AllofthesemotionsinU.S.courtsaresupportedbyexpertwitness
testimonyon the ineffectivenessof the legalsystems inLatinAmerican
countries. These opinions are buttressed by scholarship
andcommentaryonthelawintheregionthatechoesthesesameviews.Moreover,thelackofanysignificantcontraryviewsaboutlawinLatinAmerica,inthisliterature,isalsoasourceofsupportinconvincingtheU.S.judgesofthetruthoftheseclaims.
Asaresult,thesenarrativeswithrespecttolawinLatinAmericaarekeypiecesinthegeopoliticsofnationallegalsystems.Theyarenotonlyhaphazard
social constructions produced by the limitations of
comparativestudy in thecenter.Norare theynecessarily just thesumof
idiosyncraticperspectives of transnational commentators.Overall,
they can be seen torespond toreal
interestsandstakes.Thesesignificantlyshape the
internationalhierarchyofauthoritativedecisionmaking. In
thecaseshighlightedabove, they pertain especially to the
jurisdiction and judgments of LatinAmericancourts.However,
thisorderingalso impacts
thepoliticalprioritiesofdifferentnationalcommunities.Inanyprocessofharmonizationorglobalizationoflaws,legalsystemsperceivedtobeinferiorandthepolitical
options enshrinedwithin them aremuch easier todisregard,
ifnotoutright
reject.ThisexclusionaryprocesscanaffectLatinAmericancountries
ability to uphold certain national legal positions in the context
ofglobalizationandtreatynegotiations,forexample.Someofthesepositions
-
ESQUIROL ARTICLE.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) DAVID
2013 Legal Latin Americanism 159
may includeparticularlynotable
legaldevelopmentsintheregionsuchassocialrights,laborlaw,thesocialfunctionofproperty,andothers.Notallof
theexamplesneedbe from thepolitical lefteither.Thewhole
jurisprudenceonstatesofemergency,andextraordinaryexecutivepowers,areanother
exampleof abodyof law common tomanyLatinAmerican
statesthatisnotgenerallyappreciated.Inshort,thepointisthatthegeopoliticsoflawjustifiedbyjustthesortofareastudiesdescribedhereinfluencestherelativeweightthatdifferentsocietieshaveindecidingtheirownfate.IV.
TOWARD A NEW SCHOLARSHIP ON LAW IN LATIN AMERICA
Recently,newscholarshiphasbeguntoaddressthegeopoliticsofLatinAmericanlaw.56Theunderlyingparadigmsandimageshavebeencriticallyexamined.Theworkingsofthesediscursiveeconomieshavebeenidentifiedanddebated.Additionally,asalreadynoted,newgenerationsof
scholarsfromtheregionandelsewherehaveenteredthefray.57Thesedevelopmentsaresurely
transfiguring the field.However, this isnot tosay that
theoldparadigmsarenolongerentrenchedorthatscholarsdonotstilleasilydefaultintoreproducingthem.Farfromit,establishedpatternsofwritingandthinking
are stillquite compelling formany.For some, theyarealso
stillquiteconvincing.
Nevertheless,itisnowmoredifficulttodismissthemultipleaudiencesandimpactoftransnationallegalwriting.Assuch,itwouldbeintellectuallyirresponsibletoignoretheeffectsofinterveninginonearenaontheother.Awellintentioned
intervention indebates on comparative law at
thecentercouldifdirectlytransferredtodebatesinLatinAmericahavepotentially
quite negative effects on equally important concerns.
Likewise,welltargetedcritiquesin,say,localdebatesinMexicoorPerucouldproveterriblydetrimental
to thegeopoliticsof, forexample,global labor
law.58Forscholarsinterestedinatransnationalacademicpractice,thequestionofintellectual
perspective takes on added importance. This does not
meanthatdifferentforumsmaynotrequiredifferentformsandstylesofanalysisandargument.Itdoeshoweverforcethesequestionstothefore.Ataminimum,decisionsaboutcriticaltoolscanbepursuedwhilerecognizingtheirmultipleandpossiblyconflictingimpacts.
56.SeeRIVISTACRITICADELDIRITTOPRIVATO,AnnoXXIX(2011)(specialeditiononpostcoloniallawinLatinAmerica);seealsoRenewingLatinAmericanLegalStudies,HARVARDLAWSCHOOL(Nov.13,2010),http://www.harvardiglp.org/uncategorized/november13renewinglatinamericanlegalstudies/57.Seegenerally,TEXASLAWREVIEW,CONSTITUTIONALISMINLATINAMERICA(2011);FORDHAMLAWREVIEW,LAWINLATINAMERICA(2011).58.See,e.g.,AlvaroSantos,MexicanLaborLaw(onfilewithauthor).
-
ESQUIROL ARTICLE.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) DAVID
160 YALE HUMAN RIGHTS & DEVELOPMENT L.J. Symposium
A. Law-and-society
ManylegalscholarsinLatinAmericancountriesaredrawntolawandsociety
approaches.59 This orientation has generally been
associatedwiththeprogressiveleft.ItappearstoofferanalternativetothemuchmalignedlegalformalismunderstoodtobedominantinLatinAmerica.Additionally,itoffersawaytospeakabouttheactualrealityofinequality,maldistributionofresources,racialandotherformsofdiscrimination,lackoflegalenforcement,
and other illsprevailing in the country. For those focused
ontheseissues,itiscertainlyapowerfultool.Atthesametime,thetraditionalfieldof
legalLatinAmericanismhasprimarilydrawnon thesesame
lawandsocietyinsights:thegapbetween lawonthebooksandlaw
inaction,theseparateoperationofsocialnorms,thepoordegreeoflegalpenetrationinsociety,theprevalenceofonlypaperrules,theinsufficientrecognitionoflegalpluralism,etc.
Asdiscussedabove,emphasizingtheseimagesoflawintheregioncanhavesomeverypracticaleffects.IthasservedastheoversizeddiagnosisofLatinAmerican
lawand the characteristicmodeof
lawanddevelopmentdiscourse.Relatedly, it has been quite effective
in ushering in new legalmodels, internationalbestpractices,andthe
like.Intheend,LatinAmericans andothers find itquite easy tobelieve
that that their legal systemsdontworkand thatdevelopedsocieties
legalsystemsdowork.Theparticular elements typically shown
todemonstrate failure,however, are
ratherdisingenuous.Asnotedabove,theyareinmanyinstancestheendemicshortcomingsof
liberal legalsystems,onlyamplified.This tool
forreformcomesatahighprice,however.ItscontinualusewhetherbylegalLatinAmericanistsor
legalscholars inLatinAmericaperpetuates
theviewofpermanentfailure.
Thus,totheextentthatthismethodologyisindiscriminatelytrainedonthelegalsystemasawholeratherthanonspecificissuesitreplicatesthesamelegalfailurediagnosis.Intheirmostsystematicform,lawandsocietycritiquessurelyshowthatmodernliberallawcannotsatisfyitsownpretensions.Thesecritiquesemphasize
that
lawdoesnotfullypenetratesociety,andthatitcannotachievepurelegalobjectivityandjudicialindependence,among
other arguments. Still, by amplifying these insights of
lawandsocietyprimarilyonLatinAmericainparticular,thesecritiquescontinuallyundermine
thosenational legalsystems in
thebroaderglobaleconomyoflegalforms.
59.See,e.g.,DERECHOYSOCIEDADENAMRICALATINA:UNDEBATESOBRELOSESTUDIOSJURDICOSCRTICOS(MauricioGarcaVillegas&CesarRodrguezGaravitoeds.,2003).
-
ESQUIROL ARTICLE.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) DAVID
2013 Legal Latin Americanism 161
Andyet,awelldirectedlawandsocietycritiquemaybequitepowerfulon an
issue of local legal politics.60 Thus, such an approach remains
nodoubt appealing to local legal political actors. Moreover, the
dominantformsof legal reasoning inmuchofLatinAmerica furtherprovoke
thesebroadrangingcritiquesoflawsoveralldisconnectiontosociety.Thedominantmodesoflegalreasoningorlegaldogmaticsappearquiteinsulatedfrommoretransparentweighingofcompetinglocalinterestsandconsequentialeffects.61Thus,
in
theabsenceofamoreroutinerepresentationoftheseelementswithinthestandardformsoflegalreasoning,theimageofasystemwide
gap critique remains very compelling. Its
localdeployment,however,would be better informed if conductedwith
an eye toward
itsimpactintherealmofinternationallegalpolitics.Thatis,itsrepeateduseinthelocaldomainatleastinitsformasasystemwidecritiquereinforcesthelegalLatinAmericanistviewofformallawsgeneralirrelevanceinLatin
America, with all the attendant negative consequences already
discussed.62 In brief, as a common systemwide critique, it has the
negativeconsequenceof continuallydiscrediting thewholeof the legal
system. Inthisway, itunderminestheverysocietalconfidenceneededto
implementtheveryreformsbroughtaboutinthisway.
B. Distributional Analysis
Reducing all of law to distributional analysis is another
direction
forLatinAmericanistlegalscholarship.ThisisapopularformofcriticalanalysisbylegalprogressivesintheU.S.63ItisinspiredbyAmericanlegalrealism
and looks to identify the realpolitical and economic interests in
anygivenlegalposition.Thistypeofanalysisgoesdirectlytothepoint.Itsattractivenessasatool
isunderstandable.Legaldebate isoftenshrouded
interminologicalandconceptualobfuscationandconfusionastotherealinterestsatplay.As
justoneexample,someseeminglyegalitarianproposalschampioningabstractconceptsofpersonallibertycanactuallyturnout,inreality,tobenefittherichdisproportionatelyandtofurtherdisenfranchisethoselesscapableofrealizingitspromises.Asaresult,intheoftenopaqueworldoflegaldiscourse,pointingoutthewinnersandlosersisapowerfulantidote.And,indeed,thispathiswelltroddenandquitepersuasive,especiallyinleftleaningcircles.Inessence,ittreatslawassimplyanotherway
60.See,e.g.,MauricioGarcaVillegas,Noslodemercadovivelademocracia:elfenmenodel(in)cumplimientodelderechoysurelacinconeldesarrollo,lajusticia,ylademocracia,6REVISTADEECONOMAINSTITUCIONAL95(2004).61.SeeJorgeL.Esquirol,TheTurntoLegalInterpretationinLatinAmerica,26AM.U.INTLL.R.1031(2011).62.JorgeL.Esquirol,supranote15.63.SeegenerallyLAW,STATE,ANDDEVELOPMENTINLAWINLATINAMERICA(DavidTrubek&AlvaroSantoseds.,forthcoming)(onfilewithauthor).
-
ESQUIROL ARTICLE.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) DAVID
162 YALE HUMAN RIGHTS & DEVELOPMENT L.J. Symposium
ofdoing politics and cuts throughmetaphysical, culturalist,
economicist,andothermystificationsofthelawandlegaldiscourse.Clearly,ithasmuchtocommend
it. Itgets to theheartofwhatweareall interested
inwhowinsandwholoses.
Asitiscommonlyperformedinlegalanalysis,distributionalanalysisismostlybasedonagutintuition,oranimpressionisticsenseofboththeeffectsoflegalrulesandtheirultimateconsequencesondifferentconstituencies.64Butbothofthesefutureforecastsabouthowthelawwillworkitselfout,andhowitsconsequenceswillimpactthoseaffected,arehighlytenuous.Projectionsaboutwinnersand
losersarebasedonroughapproximations,guesses,andintuitionaboutruleimplementation,intheshortorlongterm.Moreover,theseassertionsaboutwinnersandlosersinanygivencasecan
also be further questioned. The analyst can be shown to be
misinformed,mistaken,ormisapprisedofthetrueinterestsofthoseaffectedorthe
likelyconsequencesofarulechange (although
theremaycertainlybesomeinstancesinwhichtherelevantinterestsandhowtheycutmayseemquiteclear.)
Assuch,distributionalanalysisof this
typecanbeendlesslyquestionedbyskepticsdemandingevermorepreciseinformation.Granted,gut
impressionsare likelyat thebaseofall legalpolitical interventions
inanydebate.Onecouldnotdefendathesisifitwerenotforasenseorpreferenceforonethingoveranother,likelyinformedbyroughestimatesabouttheiroutcomes.
But,byputting theseguessesupfrontas thereason
foradecision,distributionalanalysishighlightsthiskindofqueryingasthebasisofdebate.
Thus,
thedistributionalanalysisdiscussedhereconsistsofopenlyandexplicitlyarticulatingthelikelydistributionofpowerandresourcesresultingfromarule,withrespecttodifferentconstituencies,forthepurposeofevaluatingitsdesirability.Thisdiscursiveshiftisclearlyappealinginmanyinstances,especially
incaseswhere thosewhostand to losewouldget
toseetheirinterestsmoreclearly.However,whentransposedtocertainpolitical
contexts, this approachmaypotentiallyhave somequite
counterproductive effects. It may be that systematically making
societal
decisionsbasedonaperceptionofwinnersandlosers,decidedbyamajorityvoteforexample,couldhavenegativeconsequencesfortheverypositionsprogressivesfavor.Indeed,thisrealist/criticalmovemayunderminetheverylegalconstructsthatcouldmostdirectlyadvanceprogressiveinterests(whateverthosemaybeonagivenpoint).This
isthecasebecausethisanalyticcontributestounderminingtheatleastmarginalconfidencethatisneededforlawtooperateasaviablesocialsystem.
Nonetheless,fromapurelydistributionalperspective,someoralloflawmaybe
seenaspernicious,as it locks in certainearlier choicesunder the
64.SeeDanDanielsen,EconomicApproachestoGlobalRegulation:ExpandingtheInternationalLawandEconomicsParadigm,10J.INTLBUS.&L.23(2011).
-
ESQUIROL ARTICLE.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) DAVID
2013 Legal Latin Americanism 163
guiseoflegalrights.Inanyparticularpartyshand,legalrightscanthenserveastrumpcardsofsorts
incontemporarylegalpoliticalcontests.But,for purposes of
decisionmaking based on distributional analysis, everything should
always be potentiallyup for grabs,with
ultimatedecisionspresumablymadebasedonpoliticaloreconomicpreferencesformedelsewhere,outsideof
law.Andyet,all legalsystemsstrivefortheproperbalancebetween theneed
for legalcertaintyand legal flexibility.While legalflexibility is
undoubtedly needed, legal certainty is also
important.And,someofthatdesiredlegalcertaintyisprovidedbyholdingcertaininterestsconstant,atleastinsomeareasforsomeperiodsoftime.Thesearegenerallymaintainedashumanrights,constitutionalguarantees,recognizedformsofproperty,orother
legal rights.
(Theymayalsobeclaimedonextraorquasilegalnotionssuchaslegitimateexpectationsorhistoricalsocialgains,amongotherthings.)Ofcourse,theseconceptsarenolesssubjecttocritiqueanddeconstruction.Theirdurability
isbased,nodoubt,on impermanentdiscursive consensusesproduced
through themediumof legalandothersocietaldebates.
Withtheaboveinmind,onecouldthusspeakofthedistributionalanalysisofdoingdistributionalanalysis.That
is,doingdistributionalanalysisoflawinaparticularlegalpoliticalcontextmayhavenegativeeffectsononesultimategoal,andthusevendistributionalanalysisselfconsciouslypursuedwoulddirectagainstitsownuse.Moreover,anunrelentingdistributional
approach societywide would reject otherwise desirable
objectivesarrivedatthroughthelogicoflegalguarantees.Thisisnottosaythatdistributional
arguments cannot be a valuable intervention. However,
forpurposesofconsideringitsinternationallegalpoliticaldimension,asismyintenthere,reducing
legalanalysis
inLatinAmericadowntoonlypoliticalandeconomicchoicesreinforcestheviewoflegalfailureintheregion.Indeed,asmentionedabove,acommonperceptionisthatdecisionalchoicesarenotactuallyprocessedthroughanalysisoflegalmaterialsandtheintellectualwork
that legal reasoning implies.Rather, political and
economicchoicesaremadeelsewherebasedonotherdecisionalmodesandsimplydressedup
in the languageof law.Thus,distributionalanalysisas
theonlylegitimateanalyticalengagementforprogressivesoratleasttheonlyonenotsubjecttoimmediatecynicaldisbeliefbycriticalcolleaguesreinforcestheview,andthepractice,ofmarginalizinglegalreasoninginLatinAmerica.
C. Essentialism
Anotherexamplerelatestotheinternationalhierarchyofnationallegalsystems.Thepredominantpicture
leftby lawanddevelopment
isoneofinferior,ifnotaltogethermarginal,nationallegalsystemsinLatinAmerica.
-
ESQUIROL ARTICLE.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) DAVID
164 YALE HUMAN RIGHTS & DEVELOPMENT L.J. Symposium
This has a number of deleterious effects, already noted.Not
least is
thebackgrounditsetsforreformproposals,internationalagencyaction,negotiationsof
trade treaties (especiallywhennational lawbecomes
relevant)andthelike.Ifthesecharacterizationsoffailureweretoberejected,aquitedifferentinterventioninlegalgeopoliticscouldtaketheformofcounteringsuch
imagesbypresentingandengagingafullerrangeofparticularLatinAmericanlegalcommunities.
Recently,anumberofprogressivescholarshavebeguntocontributeinthisveryway.Somehaveshown
theactualagencyofLatinAmericans intheprocessof international
legalreform,suchasadversarialcriminalprocedure,pleabargaining,ornewlegalformssuchascollectiveconstitutionalactions.65LatinAmericansareshown
in the roleofproducingand implementing
law.Alternatively,scholarshavealsodescribed thecreativeprocess of
legal theorizing inLatinAmerica.66This combats the
generalizedperceptionproducedbytheEuropeanstrainofcomparativismthatLatin
American legal consciousness is merely mimetic of European
legalthought.Additionally,myownworkhascritiqued the
faultydiagnosisoflegalfailureundergirdinglegaldevelopmentreform.67Specifically,thatdiagnosischieflyreflectsendemicshortcomingsofmodernliberallaw,whicharenotparticular
toLatinAmericabutwhichareamplifiedon to the
region.FacedwiththegeneralperceptionoflawlessnessinLatinAmerica,Ihavealso
sought tohighlight the existing legal capital (or acquis
lgaux).This latter term refers to the sumof societal investment,
institutions,
culture,andeducationinlawinLatinAmerica,whichissignificant.
Insuchdebates,however,theseinterventionsmayproducedifferentreactionsacrossthedistinctarenasoflegalpoliticaldiscourse.Fromtheperspectiveofaprogressivescholar
in thecenter,allof
theseproposalsmayseemtosharethemistakenbeliefthatthereissomethingrealaboutnationalidentity.
Inotherwords, allof these interventions seeking to combat
thedominantandharmful imageofLatinAmerican legal
inferioritymayappeartomakethemistakeofassertingthereissuchathingasLatinAmericanorColombian,Mexican,Argentineanlegalityatall.Pointingtotheagency,
creativity, or accumulation of resources of legal actors in
LatinAmericacouldbeseenasmakinganationalistargumenthighlighting
thelocal identityof law.Certainly,anythingof the sort sounds
likeanotherone of the unbelievable mystifications that critical
legal scholars in theglobalNorthwouldquicklyeschew.
65.MximoLanger,FromLegalTransplantstoLegalTranslations:TheGlobalizationofPleaBargainingandtheAmericanizationThesisinCriminalProcedure,45HARV.INTLL.J.1(2004);AngelOquendo,UppingtheAnte:CollectiveLitigationinLatinAmerica,47COLUM.J.TRANSNATLL.248(2009).66.MEDINA,supranote4.67.Esquirol,supranote15.
-
ESQUIROL ARTICLE.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) DAVID
2013 Legal Latin Americanism 165
Fromtheperspectiveofnationallegaldebate,nationalistargumentsforlegalreformhave,theworldover,beenatriedandtrueelementintherepertoryof
legalpoliticalargument.While
itmaynothaveanydeterminatepoliticalvalence,inanyonelocaleitmaybethatthenationalistpositionatanyonetime,sayforexamplethedominantMexicanlaborlaw,mayactuallyprovequiteregressive.Inturn,aprogressive
legalscholarmaythennodoubt want to advance the critique of identity
construction against
it.Moreover,suchalegalscholarmaywanttoshowthatsustainingthisidentificationwiththenationalessencemayprovedisadvantageoustomanyinthenation.
Taking these scenarios together, critiquing Mexican labor law
anddemonstratingLatinAmericanlegalcapital,presumablypresentamethodologicalconundrum.Thefirstrejectsessentialistargumentsinlaw.Thesecondapparentlyrequiresthem.Ofcourse,theresolutionofthisquandarymaysimplybetopointoutthatagency,creativityandresourcesinlawinLatinAmericacanbedefendedwithoutmakinganessentialistclaim.ThesefeaturesarenotuniquelyorespeciallyLatinAmerican,buttheyarepresentthereasinmanyotherplaces.Yet,thepointstillremainsthatthemethodological
tactics inone arenamayplayoutverydifferently in another
andmay,onanyoneissueorsetofissues,presentscholarswithacontradictionofapproaches,
ifnotpolitics. It is in these junctures, especially, that
contemporaryprogressivescholarsaredevelopingthemostinterestingwork.
D. Latin Americans as the new Latin Americanists
Forprogressives, legalLatinAmericanismpresentsa
realconundrum.ThereisforemosttheissueofrelativepowerdynamicsthatcomeintoplaybetweentraditionallymindedLatinAmericanistsandLatinAmericabasedlegalscholars.68Specifically,LatinAmericanscholarswritingabout
law
intheirhomecountries,inthecenter,arequicklydrawntothedominantexistingframeworks
forspeakingabout the topic. In thisregard,thediscussion and
reflection has gotten to the point where Latin
Americanbasedscholarsquestionthepossibilityofamorehorizontalengagement,oreventheexpressionontheirowntermsoflegalrealitiesinLatinAmericaforaudiencesintheglobalNorth.69Thisapprehensionisexpressedintheworrythat
Latin Americans must become Latin Americanists in order to
beheardintheNorth.70Asnotedabove,thisrelatestothemodesofdiscoursethought
tobeconvincingand the typesofconcerns thataredeemedrelevant.
68.DanielBonilla,LegalClinicsintheGlobalNorthandSouth:BetweenEqualityandSubordinationAnEssay,16YALEHUM.RTS.&DEV.L.J.176(2013).69.Id.70.ELDERECHOENAMRICALATINA,supranote44.
-
ESQUIROL ARTICLE.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) DAVID
166 YALE HUMAN RIGHTS & DEVELOPMENT L.J. Symposium
OneapproachtocounterthishegemonyofLatinAmericanistsover
informationaboutLatinAmericaistorevindicatealocalepistemologyofLatin
American concerns.71 In this vein, the mere fact of Latin
Americansspeaking in the global North about issues in their
particular
locationswouldprovideanantidote.Simplyexpressinganddescribingissuesoflaw,inwhatever
vocabulary or theoreticalmode is prevalent in specific
localdebates, would then be privileged over the competing accounts
andworldviewsofLatinAmericanists.Thismovewouldsimplyattempttoflipthe
hegemonic relationship ofLatinAmericanistdiscourse and
localdiscourseaboutlaw.
Thisfliphasanumberofimmediatedrawbacks,however.IntermsofengagingLatinAmericanistdiscourse,itmerelyattemptstosubstituteonefor
theother.And, thismove is,
inmyview,alreadyprefiguredanddismissedwithinlegaldiscourseinthecenter.Merelydisplayingasampleoflocal
legal discourse for transnational audiences is typically viewed as
asortof irrelevantexoticism.The issuesandquestionsraisedare
likelynotconnectedtoongoingdebatesinthecenterortosharedperspectivesonforeign
relations and internationalpolitics in theglobalNorth.Moreover,
itmaybedifficultforactorsinthecentertodecipherthewayinwhichlocaldebatesareconducted,theparticularanalyticsemployed,andtheinterpretationsgiven
to sourcesandevents.Local legaldebates inLatinAmericamay operate on
a different plane of argumentation and evoke
differentmodesofpersuasion.Indeed,localdiscursiveroutinesandtechniquesmaybeviewedfrom
theoutsidewithsomeskepticism,notequallyconvincingto
transnationalaudiencesof the truthor logicof
theirassertions.Rather,theymayandinfact,withrespecttosomeLatinAmericanstylesoflegalreasoningare
commonly viewed as part of amistaken or
anachronisticrepertoireofargumentativetechniques.
Thus resurfaces the complaint of Latin American scholars that to
beheardintheglobalNorththeymustbecomeLatinAmericanists.ThisineffectmeansthattheymustemploytherangeofargumentativeconventionsandadopttheliketheoreticalbaggageofscholarsintheglobalNorth.Onlyinthiswaycantheybeeffectivelyheardthere.ThisofcoursemeansviewingLatinAmericathroughtherefractedprismthatlegalareastudiesscholarshaveconstructed.Toavoidthis,insistingonaseparateLatinAmericanepistemologyof
lawmay,at first,seem likea logicalobjective.Onecouldsay that
theLatinAmericanists in theglobalNorthhavesimplygotten
itwrong.Duetotheirinsufficientunderstandingoftheregion,andthevastness
of the intertextuality of sources and conventions in local legal
discourse, area studies scholars have not been sufficiently able to
penetrateandunderstand thequestions andmodesof analysis
addressedbyLatin
71.BOAVENTURADESOUZASANTOS,REFUNDACINDELESTADOENAMRICALATINA:PERSPECTIVASDESDEUNAEPISTEMOLOGADELSUR(2010).
-
ESQUIROL ARTICLE.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) DAVID
2013 Legal Latin Americanism 167
Americans.Assuch,LatinAmericanlegalscholarscouldsimplyturntheirbacksonlegalLatinAmericanismalltogetherandparticipateinanalternativenetworkandfieldoftheirowncreation.ThisapproachwouldcertainlyaddtoLatinAmericanlegalareastudiesbyprivilegingtheepistemologicalframes
of legal discourse in Latin America. Latin Americanists, in
turn,wouldthenhavetomasterthisdiscoursetoremainrelevant.ThisshiftmayintroducemoreoftheactualconcernsofpeoplelivinginLatinAmerica,orinternationalizelocaldebatesinparticularLatinAmericancountries.Thesewouldreproduceforforeignaudiences,anddemandthatthelatteraccept,locallegaldiscourseasanauthoritativeexpressionandpresentationoflocallegalknowledge.
However,simplyreproducing localLatinAmerican legaldiscourse
fortransnationalaudiencesfailstoengagetheexistingcommitmentsoftheintellectualcommunityinthecenter.LegalLatinAmericanismexistsbecausethereisanactualdemandforinformationandanalysisofthelegalsystemsintheregionfromtheperspectiveandcapacitytocomprehendoftransnationalaudiences.Indeed,possiblymoreprominentlyinthelegalfieldthanin
other disciplines, the different discursive communities have
differentconventions,theoreticalguideposts,andrepertoiresofargumentation.Thusnotall
local legaldiscourse is transparently transferable todebates in
thecenterinawaythatwouldmakesense.Infact,duetotheemphasisoflegalrealismwithinlegalLatinAmericanismmanylinesoflocalargumentationmay
seem excessively formalistic or
nonconvincing.Additionally,manyreferences
toEuropeanordoctrinalauthorities could seemquite
esoteric.Thesemaynodoubtbeincrediblysophisticated,andmaydemonstratesignificant
theoretical insights, butmay not be easily recognizable
inmainstreamdebatesinthecenter.Andstill,knowledgeaboutlawinLatinAmerica
in the center is crucially important. It is equally important that
thisinformationbepresentedanddebatedinwaysthatareactuallypersuasiveand
authoritative. Thus, legal Latin Americanism cannot be simply
replacedby ignoring itsparticular
jurisprudentialhistory,conventions,anddeepseatedbeliefs,whileattemptingtocreatearivaltransnationalSouthSouth
legalLatinAmericanism.Rather, the
fieldmustbeconfrontedwithdifferentmethodological and conceptual
tools. It is thispromise that
theexpandedranksoflegalscholarsfromLatinAmericamighthelpfulfill.
E. Critical in the Center
More relevant than
thedifferencebetweenLatinAmericansandLatinAmericanistsis,infact,themethodologicalapproachesagivenscholaremploys.LatinAmericansmorenewlyparticipating
indebates in the centermayquiteunexceptionallyadopt the
sameanalytical frameworksas theirLatinAmericanist counterparts.
Indeed, this is commonly the case. In an
-
ESQUIROL ARTICLE.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) DAVID
168 YALE HUMAN RIGHTS & DEVELOPMENT L.J. Symposium
effort tocontinue theconversationand toengage
internationalaudiences,scholarsfromtheregionmayautomaticallyadoptandrefracttheirobservations
through the existing conventions.As such,
addingLatinAmericanbasedscholars to the
ranksofLatinAmericanistsmaydo little
tochangethecentralparadigms.Theformermayindeedmorefirmlyentrenchtheexistingframeworks,withtheaddedauthorityofthesescholarslocalconnectionsandauthenticity.
Thus,inordertoevaluatethedifferentcontributionsthatLatinAmericabasedscholarsmaymake
to legalareastudies, it isnecessary
toconsiderthevaryingintellectualapproachestheymaybring.Indeed,itisnotthatinthe
pastLatinAmericanists andLatinAmericans have operated in
completelydifferentworlds.Therearemanypointsofconnection.Infact,thisessayhassought
tohighlight them.Thus, the ideahere
isnotoneofdisconnection.Rather,itisthattherearesubstantialdifferencesbetweenlegalLatinAmericanismandnationallegaldiscourseinLatinAmerica.Theseincludetheemphasesofthesefieldswhetherlegal,political,orsocialscience;andthedifferentmethodsandconventionsofengagementwithinparticularfields.
Certainly,someanalyticalapproachesaresharedratherseamlessly,asthediscussionaboveoflawandsocietyabovedemonstrates.Thisparticularmethodisaverycommonapproach.Yet,itfunctionssomewhatdifferentlythanlawandsocietyargumentsintheU.S.
Inthelatter,thesearguments are frequently used to update existing
laws in response to actualconditions,or toconsider
theconsequencesof legalalternatives
inoperation.Theymayprovidetheargumentsforlegalreform,achangeinalineofjudicialdecisions,andthe
like.InLatinAmerica,though,thismodeofargumenthasbecomemostlyanindictmentoftheentirelegalsystemforitsinconsistencywiththelocalculture.Anotherexampleistheeconomicanalyses
of law.72 Deferring to economics, in this regard, offers a
commonbridge of communication. Again, this methodology is often
deployed
tomakewholesalechangesinlegalinstitutionsandtosupplantlocallawwithinternationalbestpracticesandforeignmodels.
Bywayofanotherexample,criticallegalanalysisintheU.S.isaveryeffectivetoolforshowingtheincoherenceinalineofcasesordoctrinalareaofthelaw.73Thecontradictionsofreasoningarethencommonlyshownassupportingapoliticallyregressiveoutcome.Itisquiteeffectiveinshowingthatsuchanoutcomeisnotanecessaryoutgrowthofmerelegalreasoning.In
fact, quite the contrary, it is notdeterminatively supported by
it.Thesamemay be said about arguments based on cultural norms or
nationalidentity.Theobjective ismuch the same, showing the
incoherenceof the
72.SeeEdgardoBuscaglia&ThomasS.Ulen,AQuantitativeAssessmentoftheJudicialSectorinLatinAmerica,17INTLREV.L.&ECON.1275(1997).73.See,e.g.,DUNCANKENNEDY,ACRITIQUEOFADJUDICATION:FINDESICLE(1998).
-
ESQUIROL ARTICLE.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) DAVID
2013 Legal Latin Americanism 169
constructedentitytomakewayforarethinkingorrearrangementoflegalnorms.
InLatinAmerica,by contrast,adominanceof criticalanalysisofthis
typemaysimplyadd to thealreadyexistingpictureof
thepretextualnatureoflaw,understoodascoveringovereliteinterestsandarbitrariness.Transposedunthinkinglyand
in this single formto
legalLatinAmericanism,itmayhavesomeratherunintendedeffects.Appliedsystemwide,itcouldsimplyreinforcetheexistingdiagnosisthatlawandlegaldiscourseareirrelevantinLatinAmerica.
This isnot to say theseanalytical toolsare inherently suspect
forprogressivesworkingonLatinAmerica.Itmerelyshowshowboththetargetof
critique and the surrounding general ideology about law
significantlyinfluencethemeaningandimpactofspecificinterventions.ThesamecriticaltechniquesmayhavequitedifferenteffectswhendirectedatlawintheglobalNorth.Nodoubt,
thesedifferences aredue to contextualor
intertextualfactorssuchastherelativestrengthofthe
ideologysupportingthelegalsysteminplace,indifferentlocations.Additionally,theytendtodifferastothelevelatwhichthesecritiquesaredirected.WhereascriticalattacksintheglobalNorthoftenfocusonparticularlawsorinstitutions,theclaimsofLatinAmericanistsoftenextendtothelegalsystemaswholeandnottoindividuallegislationorlinesofjudicialprecedent.V.
CONCLUSION
It is important torecall that
legalLatinAmericanismcannotbesimplydismissedasjustirrelevantorcompletelymissingthemark.Quitethecontrary:itsmostcommonpositionsareoftenbackedandadoptedbyinternationalagenciesand
theU.S.government.Asa result, internationallysupported legal reform
is often produced and justified entirelywithin
thesecircuits.And,thesehaveadirecteffectinLatinAmerica.Theymaybe
introducedpredominantlyinpoliticalways,withthesupportofgovernmentofficials
and the main actors in important legal institutions rather
thanthroughbroadjuristicdebate,butstilltheyhavethepowertochangebroadsectorsofnationallegalinstitutionality.Untilrecently,
juristsintheregionweremostlyunattunedtothisbodyofscholarship,despitetheirextensiveawareness
of European and U.S. legal scholarship. Nonetheless,
despitetheirrelativedisengagementwiththeselawanddevelopmentdebatesandtheprojectstheydirectlyorindirectlysupport,allthoselivingintheregionhave
experienced the changes these internationally funded reforms
havewrought.
As such, thediscourse ofLatinAmericanists has had a very
tangibleimpactonLatinAmerica.Asnoted thisdiscoursehasbeenmainlyat
thepolicyandpoliticallevel.Thesedebateswerenotsignificantlytakenupbythelocallegaldiscoursenorwidelyassimilatedbylocaljurists.Now,however,withincreasingparticipationofLatinAmericansand,inturn,increas
-
ESQUIROL ARTICLE.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) DAVID
170 YALE HUMAN RIGHTS & DEVELOPMENT L.J. Symposium
ing penetration of Latin Americanist discourse in Latin America,
theseframeworksaremoredirectlybecomingapartoflocallegaldebate.Again,thishasledsomelocalscholarstoconsidertheneedtobecomeLatinAmericanists
themselves inorder toeffectivelyparticipate in
thischangingdiscursiveenvironment.Thedividing line,however,
isnotsomuchbetweenLatinAmericansandLatinAmericanistsasitisbetweenthemethodstheseadopt
and where those methods are focused. Some methodological approaches
are already widely shared. Lawandeconomics and
lawandsocietyaretwomainexamples.TheobjectivestowhicheachareputintheglobalNorthandinLatinAmericacanbequitedifferent,however,asnotedabove.Thesame
is true formoreprogressivescholarship.These faceparticular
challenges in straddling theLatinAmerica
andLatinAmericanistdivide.A certain formof systematic radical
critiquehasalreadybeen
thehallmarkoflegalLatinAmericanismanditsoverlydismissiveviewoflawintheregion.
Myobjectivehere,intheend,isnottopromoteanyparticularuniformityindiscursivefieldsortoargueforaparticularnotionoforthodoxyorcoherence
in anyones scholarly practices.Rather, amark of
contemporaryprogressivethoughtisarecognitionofthechangingnatureofmethodologicalapproachesandcommitmentsinlightofcontextualcircumstances.Asaresult,
itwould come asno surprise to anyone that todays critique of
adominantsocialconstruction,sayrightstalk,canbecometomorrowstakingabreakfromcritiquesofrightstalk.Furthermore,thisessayisnotanexhortationtoalifelongormultipleissuecommitmenttoanysortofmethodologicalchecklist.However,
it is intendedasacall tocognizanceof theeffects that thinking in
solely one legalpolitical frame may produce
inanother.Animportantstartingpoint,Iwouldsuggest,isinjectinglegalLatinAmericanismwiththespecificcriticalinsightsthatlocallegaldebatesinLatinAmericamayprovide.