Queerly Troubling International Law's Vision of “Peace”

Queering international law involves dreaming. It requires stepping outside the framing presumptions of “normal” law to reveal and challenge the heteronormative underpinnings of the hierarchies of power and value that the law sustains. Reclaiming the nomenclature of queer from its history as a term of insult and dehumanization, queer theory interrogates the normative framework that naturalizes and privileges heterosexuality and its binary regime of gender. In its reclamation, “queer” gestures toward affirmative assemblages of new meanings and emancipatory imaginaries. In international law, queer theory has been used in many different ways. For some, queerly troubling the normative involves expanding the existing normal to be more inclusive of queer lives, as can often be seen in the field of international human rights law. As life-giving as inclusion is to those barely existing on the margins, without changing the terms of inclusion this approach risks leaving heteronormativity intact and may even buttress it, as with the legal recognition of same-sex marriage. For others, queering international law involves a more fundamental critique of its regimes of the normal that, together, regulate our relations with each other and the planet. The objects of queer theory's structural critique are the conceptual foundations of international law, which rely on heteronormativity as a fundamental organizing principle that helps to normalize inequality, poverty, exploitation, and violence. One example is the “civilizing mission” which justified colonialism and continues to animate present legal norms. As Teemu Ruskola argues in his seminal queer critique, international legal rhetoric attributed normative masculinity to (Western) sovereign states and cast the “deficient” sovereignty of non-Western states in terms of variously deviant masculinities which, together with their civilizational and racial attributes, justified their “penetration.” My “troubling” of international law's account of peace takes a queer structural approach and then outlines some alternative imaginaries suggested by queer theory and activism.

Recht als Gegenstand rhetorischer Grundlagenforschung

According to the self-image of lawyers, jurisprudence is a science: the premises in legal conclusions are truth-apt, as are the conclusions or judgements that follow from them, the cognition of true law is consequently regarded as their task. Against this background, a program that understands and analyzes law as the product of a rhetorical practice is confronted with fierce resistance. According to the research of analytical legal rhetoric, on the other hand, the evidence for a rhetorical imprint on law is overwhelming: starting with the logical status of legal inferences, to the peculiarities of judicial procedure, to the motivational situation of those involved in it, everywhere it becomes apparent that the image of strict truth-orientation inadequately describes the genesis of law. Following Aristotle, who assigned law to the field of phrónēsis and not to epistēmē, contemporary legal rhetoric research aims to draw a realistic picture of the genesis of law. Subdivided into the triad of logos, ethos, and pathos, it attempts to fully grasp the interrelationships involved. It becomes apparent that the rational or argumentative dimension is far from dominating in legal justifications. It is precisely at the neuralgic point, i.e., where arguments are opposed to each other, that the rhetor typically uses a rhetorical figure that links all levels of the triad: the restrictio.

Pedagogical and Psychological Settings for Training of Student Lawyers in Framed Professional Communication

The purpose of the study was to identify how the training of student lawyers in message framing influences their professional written and verbal communication proficiency. The study used qualitative research methods such as observations and focus groups to yield the data for the analysis. The focus group was used to obtain feedback from the sampled students concerning the training in framing messages. The study found that a specifically structured instructional model that relied on a ‘bolt-on’ module in message framing delivered throughout the entire elective course in Legal Rhetoric positively influenced students’ professional written and verbal communication proficiency. The data drawn from observations showed that students' abilities to use functional language and language rules increased throughout the training. When rating the activities for training in framing messages that are useful for lawyers, the observers mentioned five framing message activities seen as the most effective. Those were as follows: gain and loss, storytelling, WASP, call-to-action, ethos, and pathos. Gain and loss, ethos and pathos, and storytelling were rated by the observers higher than WASP and call-to-action. These were considered by the observers to be the most appropriate for the lawyer job context. Data relating to students’ general impressions of training in framing messages showed that they found this training interesting and engaging, practically useful for their jobs. Received: 14 April 2021 / Accepted: 5 July 2021 / Published: 5 September 2021

A Comparative Study of the Rhetorical Functions and Features of Personal Pronouns in English and Chinese Legal News

This paper mainly discusses the distribution and rhetorical functions of personal pronouns in English and Chinese legal news reports which is divided into two narrative types, the objective and the semi-dialogic. Through the comparative analysis of some English and Chinese legal news texts in the two types, it finds that the differences in narrative type directly affect the distribution of personal pronouns. In objective narrative, the use of third person pronouns accounts for an absolute proportion, and the frequency of using first person and second person pronouns is close to zero. In semi-dialogic narrative, the use of third person pronouns is still the highest, but only slightly higher than the use of first person and second person pronouns, accounting for only a small number. After analysis, this paper holds that there are three reasons for the uneven distribution: first, the differences between the dialogic style and the narrative style; second, the legal narrative being a story narrative; third, the specific restrictions on the use of legal rhetoric.

Russia and the Right to Self-Determination in the Post-Soviet Space

As a concept of international law, the right to self-determination is widely renowned for its lack of clarity. Broadly speaking, one can differentiate between a liberal and a nationalist tradition. In modern international law, the balance between these two opposing traditions is sought in an attempt to contain or ‘domesticate’ the nationalist conception by limiting it to ‘abnormal’ situations, that is to colonialism in the sense of ‘alien subjugation, domination and exploitation’. Essentially, this distinction between ‘normal’ and ‘abnormal’ situations has since, the distinction was made, been the heart of the matter in the legal discourse on the right to self-determination, with the important qualification regarding the need to preserve existing borders. This book situates Russia’s approach to the right to self-determination in that discourse by way of a regional comparison vis-à-vis a ‘Western’ or European perspective, and a temporal comparison with the former Soviet doctrine of international law. Against the background of the Soviet Union’s role in the evolution of the right to self-determination, the bulk of the book analyses Russia’s relevant state practice in the post-Soviet space through the prisms of sovereignty, secession, and annexation, illustrated by a total of seven case studies on the conflicts over Abkhazia, Chechnya, Crimea, Nagorno-Karabakh, South Ossetia, Tatarstan, and Transnistria. Complemented by a review of the Russian scholarship on the right to self-determination, it is suggested that Russia’s approach may be best understood not only in terms of power politics disguised as legal rhetoric, but can be seen as evidence of traits of a regional (re-)fragmentation of international law.

Final Conclusions

The book concludes with the suggestion that Russia’s approach to the right of peoples to self-determination may be best understood not only in terms of Russian power politics disguised as legal rhetoric but can be seen as evidence of traits of a regional (re-)fragmentation of international law. Even basic agreement on what self-determination as a concept of international law means and what role related concepts such as territorial integrity, secession, referendum, or the prohibition of the use of force do or should play in that context seems almost unattainable, to the effect that international law as a single epistemological frame is arguably in a similar danger as during Soviet times. Today, apart from Lauri Mälksoo’s work and occasional contributions by a handful of other scholars in the West, analyses of Russia’s post-Soviet state practice and doctrine in the international legal discourse usually confine themselves to assess the legality of Russia’s actions in terms of positive international law. Such a limited approach fails to attempt to understand diverging views on international law, something which was perceived as self-evident during the Cold War period.

Rhetorical training in higher education as the basis of professional speech practice of a lawyer

The article examines the speech competencies formed in practical classes in the disciplines “Rhetoric for lawyers” and “Legal rhetoric in the activities of a lawyer”: communicative, textual, lexical and orthological. The article is based on the methodological understanding of rhetoric as an academic discipline that improves the speech-thinking activity of students in the direction of training “jurisprudence”. This is expressed in the ability to create professionally meaningful texts, replenishment of vocabulary in accordance with professional and intellectual needs, solving communication problems at various levels. The author of the article believes that the successful professional speech practice of a lawyer, which requires well-formed communication skills, is due, inter alia, to linguistic training at a university. The purpose of the disciplines of the humanitarian cycle is to form the rhetorical skills of students, necessary to create eff ective argumentation, the ability to speak in public and influence the persuasion of listeners; updating the writing skills of a future lawyer. The author identifi es a number of issues that are most signifi cant in teaching rhetoric, such as the formation of language competence, including communicative, textual, orthological aspects and teaching methods. The latter are based on general didactic teaching methods. Taking into account the specifi cs of training in a law school, the most eff ective is a student-centered approach to learning, namely: methods of explanation, practice, self-esteem, control and self-control. The author describes an example of a lesson methodology aimed at developing the above competencies.

Russland und das Selbstbestimmungsrecht der Völker im postsowjetischen Raum

As a concept of international law, the right to self-determination is widely renowned for its unclarity. Broadly speaking, one can differentiate between a liberal and a nationalist tradition. In modern international law, the balance between these two opposing traditions is sought in an attempt to contain or ‘domesticate’ the nationalist conception by limiting it to ‘abnormal’ situations, i.e. to colonialism in the sense of ‘alien subjugation, domination and exploitation’. Essentially, this distinction between ‘normal’ and ‘abnormal’ situations has since been the heart of the matter in the legal discourse on the right to self-determination, with the important qualification regarding the need to preserve existing borders. This study situates Russia’s approach to the right to self- determination in that discourse by way of a regional comparison vis-à-vis a ‘western’ or European perspective, and a temporal comparison with the former Soviet doctrine of international law. Against the background of the Soviet Union’s role in the evolution of the right to self-determination, the bulk of the study analyses Russia’s relevant state practice in the post-Soviet space through the prisms of sovereignty, secession, and annexation. Complemented by a review of the Russian scholarship on the topic, it is suggested that Russia’s approach to the right to self-determination may be best understood not only in terms of power politics disguised as legal rhetoric, but can be seen as evidence of traits of a regional (re-)fragmentation of international law.