Suchergebnisse

An article taken from the John Coffin lecture in the History of Ideas, which was given by the author at the Institute of Advanced Legal Studies, University of London, on May 13, 2008. The author considers in particular the model of contemporary constitutionalism that looks to constitutional adjudication as a way of transforming economies and polities, societies and cultures.

Globalization is not simply a matter of transnational trade, and of the state, non-state and supra-state legal regimes which facilitate, regulate or resist it; it also involves transnational social, cultural, intellectual and ideological forces. These forces play upon strategically located knowledge-based elites which play an important role in restructuring the legal fields by which public and public and private institutions are constituted. Canada's experience of globalization—unique because of proximity to the United States—has been both exemplified and, in part, shaped by the fate of its knowledge-based elites, including the business community (especially that part of it involved directly or indirectly with transnational corporations), academics and intellectuals, lawyers, artists and other cultural figures, and individuals involved in politics and public administration. Because of the effects of this "globalization of the mind" upon the institutions which all of these elites inhabit, state and non-state legal fields associated with them have been transformed.

Legal practise is shaped by its social, political and economic environment. Canada's "new economy" of decreasing state regulation, globalization, computerization and changes in information technology, and the shift from manufacturing to the service sector has grave - largely negative - implications for the future of law and lawyers. Moreover, the profession is fragmented and stratified. It comprises multiple constituencies - solo practitioners, large corporate firms and specialists - with differing demographies and professional roles, which are implicated in varying degrees in the "new economy". As a result, they experience the restructuring of professional knowledge, governance, ethics and culture in ways so diverse as to put in question the prospects of a common professional future.

The Law Society Act of 1970 subjected the government of the legal profession in Ontario to systematic scrutiny for the first time in half a century. H.W. Arthurs studies the powers and functions of the Law Society and its form of governance, and concludes that the new Act moves the regulation of the legal profession beyond mere accountability to representative or even participatory democracy. Moreover, the introduction of public accountability through the Act is itself a major advance. At bottom, scrutiny of the legal profession is here to stay.

The lawmaking process has diffused substantially in the past years, resulting in an increasing maze of departmental subordinate legislation. This phenomenon has not been accompanied by a parallel development of controls resulting in complaints about "bureaucracy", red-tape, inaccessability, and poor draftsmanship, and in demands for review and control. Professor Arthurs recognizes the practical inevitability of the system, but discusses the present situation critically, suggesting reforms which might help to make the regulatory process more compatible with "participatory democracy".