Bert van Roermund – författare

The EU legal order sits above a diverse mix of 27 national legal systems, with some 23 different languages. Amongst such diversity, how can the unity and coherence of the European legal system be guaranteed? Is there a common understanding between lawyers from different national backgrounds as to the meaning and application of EU law?In addressing these issues the idea of 'common concepts' has played a crucial role - it is argued that the unity of the system is guaranteed by the consistent application of certain core principles shaping the law. To what extent can these concepts be trusted to provide a firm basis for the coherence of the EU legal order?Believers in common concepts argue that there is a relatively clear, shared and accepted framework of ideas, providing an understanding of the system that is ultimately unified in spite of all apparent divergence. Sceptics hold that there is no such framework; 'common concepts' turn out to be additional sources of misunderstanding, confusion and, subsequently, legal divergence. According to a third thesis, there is indeed no common conceptual core, but the necessary unity and coherence of EU law can be articulated and even reinforced through the use of divergent concepts.The contributors to this collection of essays address these issues from different disciplinary perspectives - legal sociology, linguistics, comparative law, European legal scholarship, legal theory and practical experience. The research group focused on the application of two general themes: the protection of rights and judicial discretion. In addition to the thematic research, case studies from core policy sectors are featured, including energy regulation and social policy.

How do memory and remembrance relate to the specific mode of transitional justice that lays emphasis on restoration? What is captured and what is obliterated in individual and collective efforts to come to terms with a violent past? Across this volume consisting of twelve in-depth contributions, the politics of memory in various countries are related to restorative justice under four headings: restoring trust, restoring truth, restoring land and restoring law. While the primary focus is a philosophical one, authors also engage in incisive analyses of historical, political and/or legal developments in their chosen countries. Examples of these include South Africa, Colombia, Rwanda, Israel and the land of Palestine, which they know all too well on a personal basis and from daily experience.

Legal Thought and Philosophy clarifies background questions in legal research projects, such as the relationship between law and justice, law and politics, law and knowledge, facts and norms, normativity and validity, constituent and constitutional power, and rule and context. It provides advanced students in law and philosophy with an account of legal thinking that combines analytical and phenomenological insights.From a conception of justice as principled political self-restraint, the book explains why there are moral reasons to separate law from morality conceptually and in what sense a legal order is positive - that is, set by authority and bound up with history. The book explores the conditions under which law may become an object of knowledge and theorizing, before finally discussing how these features come together in law as rule-following by citizens, officials, judges, and legislators alike.Addressing advanced students in law and philosophy, this key book:bridges separate traditions in legal philosophy (in particular analytical philosophy and phenomenology)develops a view of law as an institution of authority from a conception of justice in the socio-political relationship between 'we' and 'the others'presents a systematic account of normativity and validityexplains in what sense law is 'doing things with rules'.

Legal Thought and Philosophy clarifies background questions in legal research projects, such as the relationship between law and justice, law and politics, law and knowledge, facts and norms, normativity and validity, constituent and constitutional power, and rule and context. It provides advanced students in law and philosophy with an account of legal thinking that combines analytical and phenomenological insights.From a conception of justice as principled political self-restraint, the book explains why there are moral reasons to separate law from morality conceptually and in what sense a legal order is positive - that is, set by authority and bound up with history. The book explores the conditions under which law may become an object of knowledge and theorizing, before finally discussing how these features come together in law as rule-following by citizens, officials, judges, and legislators alike.Addressing advanced students in law and philosophy, this key book:bridges separate traditions in legal philosophy (in particular analytical philosophy and phenomenology)develops a view of law as an institution of authority from a conception of justice in the socio-political relationship between 'we' and 'the others'presents a systematic account of normativity and validityexplains in what sense law is 'doing things with rules'.

The first-person plural - 'we, ourselves' - is the hallmark of a democracy under the rule of law in the modern age. Exploring the roots of this 'rule of recognition', Bert van Roermund offers an in-depth reading of Rousseau's work, focusing on its most fundamental leitmotif: the sovereignty of the people.Providing an innovative understanding of Rousseau's politico-legal philosophy, this book illustrates the legal significance of plural agency and what it means for a people to act together: What do people share when using the word 'we'? What makes a people's actions political? And what exactly is 'bodily' about their joint commitment? Testing these ideas in three controversial modern debates - bio-technology, immigrant rights and populism - Van Roermund offers a critical assessment of 'political theology' in contemporary legal environments and establishes a new interpretation of joint action as bodily entrenched.Incisive and cutting-edge, this book is crucial reading for scholars of jurisprudence and legal and political philosophy, particularly those with a focus on Rousseauian theory. Students of jurisprudence and constitutional theory will also benefit from its philosophical and political insights, as well as its discussions of pressing real-world issues.

The first-person plural - ''we, ourselves'' - is the hallmark of a democracy under the rule of law in the modern age. Exploring the roots of this ''rule of recognition'', Bert van Roermund offers an in-depth reading of Rousseau''s work, focusing on its most fundamental leitmotif: the sovereignty of the people.

  Providing an innovative understanding of Rousseau''s politico-legal philosophy, this book illustrates the legal significance of plural agency and what it means for a people to act together: What do people share when using the word ''we''? What makes a people''s actions political? And what exactly is ''bodily'' about their joint commitment? Testing these ideas in three controversial modern debates - bio-technology, immigrant rights and populism - Van Roermund offers a critical assessment of ''political theology'' in contemporary legal environments and establishes a new interpretation of joint action as bodily entrenched.

  Incisive and cutting-edge, this book is crucial reading for scholars of jurisprudence and legal and political philosophy, particularly those with a focus on Rousseauian theory. Students of jurisprudence and constitutional theory will also benefit from its philosophical and political insights, as well as its discussions of pressing real-world issues.

In seven pioneering dialogues, Bert van Roermund resumes the conversations he has had over the last twenty-five years on reconciliation after political oppression. Questions of time are predominant here: How does memory relate to both past and future? Can one be a victim and perpetrator at the same time? Is reconciliation ultimately based on an original bond among humans that enables survivors to forgive their former oppressors? Does this entail a betrayal of past sufferings?Such questions are discussed in this book by a group of philosophers from (former) conflict areas around the globe. Both the characters and the dialogues are fictional, but at the same time, they are as real as can be. They originate in conversations with many colleagues and intensive research within an international network of scholars, writers, artists, and political activists. Chapters provide philosophical discussions on the highly relevant topic of law, time, and reconciliation.The book reaches out to all those who wish to reflect on the challenges of peace work, restorative and transitional justice, refugee policies and military interventions, as well as students and teachers of relevant disciplines including social ethics, political philosophy, human rights and international relations.