Suchergebnisse

1\. Introduction 5 2\. The Transplant Approach and the Andean Puzzles 5 2.1 Aims and Limitations of the Transplant Approach 5 2.2 Three Andean Puzzles 7 3\. Epistemic Communities and Advocacy Coalitions: A Framework 9 4\. The Andean-European Network 11 4.1 Crafting a Policy Core for the Network 11 4.2 Diffusing the Network's Policy Program 14 5\. Conditions for the Action of Networks: Using Windows of Opportunities 14 6\. Contesting the Governments' Control over the Integration Process 16 6.1 The Case of the Chilean Parliament 16 6.2 Colombia and its Supreme Court 16 7\. Expanding the Network: Bringing the Judges in 18 8\. Conclusion 20 Literature 22 ; Legal transplants have traditionally been believed to be the product of reason and informed decision-making that follow arduous deliberations and bargaining between lawmakers. This paper argues that some major legal transformations can be better explained with the help of networks. It delves into the history of the establishment of the Andean Court of Justice and asks who got to decide the major questions in regard to the institutional design of the court. I argue that contrary to dominant assumptions, consultants and think tanks play a decisive role in the shaping of legal transplants. They are the ones that decide which model to follow. They get to choose participants in relevant working groups and it is them who shape the final proposal that will be voted by the lawmaker. As the complexity of the topic increases, professional networks can use technical discourse that makes scrutiny unlikely. The research shows that in case of Andean regional integration, the personal background of consultant is also very relevant, because it determines what models will be considered for eventual benchmarking. However, the mere existence of networks is not enough for producing legal change; a window of opportunity is a necessary condition.

The article stems from a broader ongoing research project on Internet, Global Constitutionalism and Ethics. We attempt to brisk up traditional ethical thinking against the background of urgent questions concerning the Internet. By revisiting the perspective of cosmopolitanism that was inspired by Kant's thesis of a universal rationality, reflecting upon Hanna Arendt's critical analysis of moral claims and political outcome, and building on Capurro's "net ethics", we introduce a perspective aiming at an intercultural understanding that might guide our actions in global politics in times of the so called digital era. The article advances the idea by Hannah Arendt that a concrete example as such has moral relevance and therefore makes a case to foster this approach using "best practices" as explicit examples to follow. ; Este artículo deriva de un proyecto de investigación mayor sobre Internet, Constitucionalismo Global y Ética. En él intentamos avivar el pensamiento ético tradicional a la luz de preguntas urgentes relativas a Internet. Pasamos revista a la perspectiva del cosmopolitismo, reflexionando sobre el análisis crítico de aseveraciones morales y los resultados políticos, y, finalmente, construyendo sobre la "net ethics" de Capurro, presentamos una perspectiva que apunta a un entendimiento intercultural capaz de guiar nuestras acciones en la política global en tiempos de la denominada "era digital". El artículo utiliza de idea de Hannah Arendt que afirma que un ejemplo concreto, como tal, tiene relevancia moral y, por ende, propone este enfoque relativo a las "mejores prácticas" como un ejemplos explícitos a seguir. ; Este artigo deriva de um projeto de investigação maior sobre Internet, Constitucionalismo Global e Ética. Nele tentamos avivar o pensamento ético tradicional à luz de preguntas urgentes relativas à Internet. Passamos em revista a perspectiva do cosmopolitismo, refletindo sobre a análise crítica de asseverações morais e os resultados políticos, e, finalmente, construindo sobre a "net ethics" de ...

Legal transplants have traditionally been believed to be the product of reason and informed decision-making that follow arduous deliberations and bargaining between lawmakers. This paper argues that some major legal transformations can be better explained with the help of networks. It delves into the history of the establishment of the Andean Court of Justice and asks who got to decide the major questions in regard to the institutional design of the court. I argue that contrary to dominant assumptions, consultants and think tanks play a decisive role in the shaping of legal transplants. They are the ones that decide which model to follow. They get to choose participants in relevant working groups and it is them who shape the final proposal that will be voted by the lawmaker. As the complexity of the topic increases, professional networks can use technical discourse that makes scrutiny unlikely. The research shows that in case of Andean regional integration, the personal background of consultant is also very relevant, because it determines what models will be considered for eventual benchmarking. However, the mere existence of networks is not enough for producing legal change; a window of opportunity is a necessary condition.