Intercultural Justice. Cutting Across the Cultural Boundaries of Legal Norms



This chapter explores the possibilities of inter-normativity in culturally complex contexts and its relation to the idea of a reflexive or self-critical modernity. The paper looks at the debates on justice in contemporary political philosophy in order to show the shortfalls of a constructivist approach to the normative analysis of culture, while it simultaneously portrays the affinity of the communitarian approach to several pluralist currents in modern legal anthropology. The key to the cultural translation of the principles of justice is to be found in their social and subjective effectiveness and in the affinity among the social goods to be normatively protected. The paper refers to several experiences of legal pluralism with ethno-religious communities and native peoples, and to the demands of Islamic feminism, to demonstrate that it is possible to ‘read’ customary practices through the lenses of state law and to defend ‘modern’ normative intentions with traditional languages and principles.


Native People Social Good Regulative Principle Cultural Boundary Legal Pluralism 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Arbeláez de Tobón, L. 2004. La Jurisdicción Especial Indígena en Colombia y los mecanismos de coordinación con el sistema judicial nacional. Consejo Superior de la Judicatura de Colombia. Accessed August 11, 2004.
  2. Bé-Nkogho Bé, J.R. 2006. La persistance de la justice traditionnelle au Gabon: quelques réflexions. Ethno-web.
  3. Boyd, M. 2004. Dispute resolution in family law: Protecting choice, promoting inclusion – executive summary. December 2004.
  4. Cairns, A. 2000. Citizens plus: Aboriginal peoples and the Canadian State. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.Google Scholar
  5. Depew, R.C. 1996. Popular justice and aboriginal communities. Some preliminary considerations. Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law 36: 21–67 (Special Issue: Popular justice: Conflict resolutions within communities).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ehrlich, E. 1986. In Gesetz und lebendes Recht: Vermischte kleinere Schriften. Bd. 61 of Schriftenreihe zur Rechtssoziologie und Rechtstatsachenforschung, ed. Manfred Rehbinder. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.Google Scholar
  7. Fernea, E.W. 1998. In search of Islamic feminism: One woman’s global journey. New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
  8. García, F. 2002. Formas indígenas de administrar justicia. Estudios de caso de la nacionalidad quichua ecuatoriana. Quito: FLACSO.Google Scholar
  9. Gaviria Díaz, C. 2002. Sentencia de Tutela T-349 de 1996. In Sentencias. Herejías constitucionales, 351–367. México: Fondo de Cultura Económica-Colombia.Google Scholar
  10. Green, R.G. 1998. Justice in aboriginal communities. Sentencing alternatives. Saskatoon: Purich Publishers.Google Scholar
  11. Hart, H.L.A. 1961. The concept of law. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  12. International Labour Organisation. 1989. Convention 169 concerning indigenous and tribal peoples in independent countries.
  13. Mernissi, F. 2003. Beyond the veil: Male-female dynamics in modern Muslim world. London: Saqi Books.Google Scholar
  14. Moghissi, H. 1999. Feminism and Islamic fundamentalism: The limits of postmodern analysis. London: Zed Books.Google Scholar
  15. Rawls, J. 1980. Kantian constructivism in moral theory. The Journal of Philosophy 77(9): 515–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Rawls, J. 1993. Political liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Sheleff, L. 2000. The future of tradition. Customary law, common law and legal pluralism. London: Frank Cass.Google Scholar
  18. Taylor, Ch. 1992. Sources of the self. The making of modern identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Van Cott, D.L. 2000. The friendly liquidation of the past: The politics of diversity in Latin America. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
  20. Walzer, M. 1983. Spheres of justice: A defense of pluralism and equality. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC)MadridSpain

Personalised recommendations