Advertisement

In the Law We Trust. Some Thoughts on the ‘Legislative Gap’ in Legal Studies

  • Wim VoermansEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Legisprudence Library book series (LEGIS, volume 5)

Abstract

Legislation and the enactment of legislation is of primary importance for the development of the law in modern jurisdictions. The law depends on it—the bulk of the law is created by way of legislation. One would expect that this importance is reflected in legal research and education. But in fact it is not. This contribution looks into the neglect of legislative studies in traditional legal scholarship and the all but absence of it in academic teaching curricula of law. The scant attention for legislation and legislative studies illustrates quite well the character of academic legal curricula in most modern Western jurisdictions; they are more or less judge-centred. The contribution rallies for more scientific-based, open-minded and future-oriented forms of legal research and academic training.

Keywords

Legislative knowledge Legislative training Legal education Law curricula 

References

  1. Ashenden S (2010) Legality, legitimacy, and the circumstances of sociology. In: Thornhill C, Ashenden S (eds) Legality and legitimacy: normative and sociological approaches. Nomos, Baden-Baden, pp 57–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Besselink LFM, Pennings FJL, Prechal A (2011) The eclipse of the legality principle in the European Union. Kluwer Law International, Alphen aan den RijnGoogle Scholar
  3. Bruinsma F (2008) Wetenschap of woordkunst: het werkgroeponderwijs als toets (Science or word art: law classes as a test). Nederlands Juristenblad (Dutch Lawyers J) 39:2451–2455Google Scholar
  4. Campbell T (2012) Legal studies. In: Goodin RE, Pettit P, Pogge T (eds) A companion to contemporary political philosophy, 2nd edn. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford, pp 226–253Google Scholar
  5. Clark DS (2012) Legal education. In: Clark DS (ed) Comparative law and society. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham/Northampton, pp 328–361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Habermas J (1992) Faktizität und Geltung. Beiträge zur Diskurstheorie des Rechts und des demokratischen Rechtsstaats. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am MainGoogle Scholar
  7. Leeuw F (1995) Policy theories, knowledge utilization and evaluation. In: Rist RC (ed) Policy evaluation: linking theory to practice. Edward Elgar, Aldershot, pp 19–37Google Scholar
  8. Legislative Review Committee (Grosheide Committee) (2000) Regels en risico’s (Rules and risks). The HagueGoogle Scholar
  9. Loth M (2014) Hoe raar zijn die juristen eigenlijk? Naar een pluriforme rechtswetenschap in een transnationale context (How strange are lawyers actually? Towards a pluralist legal scholarship in a transnational context). Nederlands Juristenblad (Dutch Lawyers J) 1272:1738–1741Google Scholar
  10. Marguery TP (2005) Tu seras juge, ou avocat mon fils! In: Brouwer JG (ed) Wat maakt een goed jurist? Boom juridische uitgevers, The Hague, pp 109–113Google Scholar
  11. Posner RA (1990) The problems of jurisprudence. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  12. Samuelson PA (1975) The conversion of the law school and the university. Am Sch 44:256–271Google Scholar
  13. Sanderson I (2000) Evaluation in complex policy systems. Evaluation 6(4):433–454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Scharpf FW (1999) Governing in Europe: effective and democratic? Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Scheltema M (1989) Wie stelt de wet: de wetgever of de rechter? In: van Dijk P (ed) De relatie tussen wetgever en recht er in een tijd van rechterlijk activisme (The relation between legislature and judiciary in times of judicial activism). Mededelingen van de Afdeling Letterkunde (Nieuwe Reeks) 52/3. Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen, Amsterdam, pp 9–18Google Scholar
  16. Stolker C (2014) Rethinking the law school. Education, research, outreach and governance. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Van den Bos K (2014) Kijken naar het recht (Looking at the law). Inaugural address, University of Utrecht. Available in Dutch at: http://njb.nl/Uploads/2014/10/Van-den-Bos%2D%2D2014-oratie%2D%2Dempirische-rechtswetenschap%2D%2Donline-versie-.pdf (last consulted 2 February 2018)
  18. Veblen T (2000) The higher learning in America (1918), with a new introduction by Ivar Berg. Transaction Publishers, PiscatawayGoogle Scholar
  19. Voermans WJM (2011) Legaliteit als middel tot een doel (The principle of legality as means to an end). In: Controverses rondom legaliteit en legitimatie, 3–101. Handelingen NJV - Nederlandse Juristen Vereniging (Acts of the Dutch Society for Lawyers), 141e jaargang. Kluwer, DeventerGoogle Scholar
  20. Voermans WJM (2015) Waarom is er zo weinig wetgevingsonderwijs in de universitaire rechtenopleiding? (Why is there so little legislative training and tuition in legal academic curricula?). RegelMaat (Dutch J Legis Stud) 30(2):68–80.  https://doi.org/10.5553/RM/0920055X2015030002002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Waldron J (1999a) The dignity of legislation. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Waldron J (1999b) Law and disagreement. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Witteveen W (2002) De toekomst van de nationale rechtsstaat (The future of the national ‘rechtsstaat’ – rule of law). Report Wetenschappelijke Raad voor het Regeringsbeleid (WRR) (The Netherlands’ Scientific Council for Government Policy). WRR, The HagueGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Universiteit Leiden – Faculteit Rechtsgeleerdheid, Instituut voor Publiekrecht, Staats- en BestuursrechtLeidenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations