Books by Malcolm Langford
Over the past two decades, various researchers have developed the notion of a ‘Legal Complex’ (se... more Over the past two decades, various researchers have developed the notion of a ‘Legal Complex’ (see generally Karpik and Halliday, 2011). It has challenged the prevailing sociology of the legal profession, which views lawyers in largely materialist terms, and tested the hypothesis that the Legal Complex may act in a self-appointed role as guardians of autonomous law, defined as core civil rights. The growing body of research suggests that that the Legal Complex does mobilise in diverse circumstances but that action is often reactive, rests on fragile organizational capacity, and is vulnerable to silencing by political authority (Halliday and Karpik, 1998; Halliday, Karpik and Feeley, 2012, 2008). Yet, there is evidence that the nexus of bar and bench is a frequent and powerful core alliance in many transitions towards or in defence of political liberalism.
One glaring omission in the comparative/historical studies is the Nordic region. These states present a potential challenge to the Legal Complex hypothesis, particularly claims that it is of ‘universal application’ (Halliday, Karpik and Feeley, 2008). Sitting atop most global indexes on core civil rights (and political/social rights), the Nordic states seem curiously devoid of a visible legal fraternity; representing the almost antithesis of turbocharged American legal adversarialism (Hirschl, 2011; Kagan, 2001). This project therefore sets out to examine whether such Nordic exceptionalism exists, with a focus on key moments in Nordic political liberalism. In so doing, it seeks to avoid, however, the typical Panglossian trappings of Nordic exceptionalist literature, prone to a reification of Nordic cultural trappings, an occlusion of the diversity of domestic actors and part political construction of the Nordic brand, and the conflation of diverging trajectories amongst the Nordic countries (for critiques along these lines, see Barker, 2012; Browning, 2007; Langford and Karlsson Schaffer, 2013).
This is a collaborative project between the University of California, Berkeley and the University of Oslo (NCHR’s Human Rights and Constitutionalism Group).
Across the globe, we see an increasing polarization and judicialization of sexual and reproductiv... more Across the globe, we see an increasing polarization and judicialization of sexual and reproductive rights (SRR). Due to the morally charged and politically divisive nature of SRRs, and the ambiguous role of rights in these disputes, this lawfare poses particular challenges for the legitimacy of domestic courts and, now, international human rights bodies. These are issues where adjudication, regardless of the outcome, plays into heated social and political debates, where the meaning and content of rights (such as the right to life or marriage) is deeply contested and the liberal western human rights framework is explicitly challenged.
This book project sets out to better understand the causes, function, impact and legitimacy of international adjudication as an emerging site of struggle over sexual and reproductive rights. It is a part of PluriCourts - The Centre for the Study of the Legitimate Roles of the Judiciary in the Global Order, a Centre of Research Excellence at the Faculty of Law, University of Oslo. Pluricourts analyses the legitimacy of expanding international adjudication from legal, political science and philosophical perspectives through empirical studies of the origins, functions and effects of international courts and tribunals and their interrelationship with political and legal theory.
Edited by Michael Stein and Malcolm Langford
Edited by Malcolm Langford, Cesar Rodriguez and Julietta Rossi
Edited by Malcolm Langford
Edited by Malcolm Langford and Anna Russell
On 10 December 2008, the UN General Assembly adopted the Optional Protocol to the International C... more On 10 December 2008, the UN General Assembly adopted the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. This new commentary aims to address the need for scholarly research, reasoned argument, consistent interpretation and creative approaches to adjucation under the new OP-ICESCR to ensure that its promise and purpose is fully realised. The edited book is divided into three main sections that respectively address procedural issues, substantive interpretation and remedies and enforcement. Each of the chapters sets out the background to the relevant article of the Protocol and analyses the different issues that are likely to arise in its interpretation and application. It seeks to move beyond a standard legal commentary to ask how the mechanism can be effectively applied and interpreted.
Edited by Malcolm Langford, Andy Sumner and Alicia Yamin
Edited by M. Langford, M. Scheinin, W. Vandenhole and W. Van Genugten)
Edited by Malcolm Langford
Edited by J. Squires, M. Langford and B. Thiele
Journal Articles by Malcolm Langford
International Data Privacy Law, 2022
Much of the legal and technical literature on data anonymization has focused on structured data s... more Much of the legal and technical literature on data anonymization has focused on structured data such as tables. However, unstructured data such as text documents or images are far more common, and the legal requirements that must be fulfilled to properly anonymize such data formats remain unclear and underaddressed by the literature. In the absence of a definition of the term ‘anonymous data’ in the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), we examine its antithesis—personal data—and the identifiability test in Recital 26 GDPR to understand what conditions must be in place for the anonymization of unstructured data. This article examines the two contrasting approaches for determining identifiability that are prevalent today: (i) the risk-based approach and (ii) the strict approach in the Article 29 Working Party’s Opinion on Anonymization Techniques (WP 216). Through two case studies, we illustrate the challenges encountered when trying to anonymize unstructured datasets. We show that, while the risk-based approach offers a more nuanced test consistent with the purposes of the GDPR, the strict approach of WP 216 makes anonymization of unstructured data virtually impossible as long as the original data continues to exist. The concluding section considers the policy implications of the strict approach and technological developments that assist identification, and proposes a way forward
Computers in Human Behavior, 2021
This study examines academic teachers ' agency and emergency responses, prompted by the physical ... more This study examines academic teachers ' agency and emergency responses, prompted by the physical closure of universities and university colleges due to the COVID-19 crisis. The pandemic-related lockdown accelerated the digitalization of education and forced teachers to adjust their teaching. A theoretical model is elucidated, in which teachers ' agency is understood as the willingness to engage in iterational, practical-evaluative, projective, and transformative action despite the existence of practical, personal, and institutional constraints. We explored the nature and degree of this agency through a survey of university teachers in Norway in the first month of the lockdown. Teachers attempted to create learning environments that facilitated knowledge transfer and interaction and sought to solve problems through self-help and support from colleagues and network, although many struggled with insufficiently developed digital competence and institutional support. Latent profile and qualitative analyses revealed different clusters of teacher responses, from strong resistance to online teaching through to transformation of teaching practices. Qualitative analyses unveiled different expressions of teachers ' agency, both ostensible and occlusive, whereby action was shaped by constraining circumstances. These findings can inform future studies of online teaching, indicate the conditions for development of teachers ' digital competence, and illustrate the challenges brought about by crises.
Journal of World Investment & Trade, 2020
The ongoing 'legitimacy crisis' in investor-State dispute settlement (ISDS) has triggered a compr... more The ongoing 'legitimacy crisis' in investor-State dispute settlement (ISDS) has triggered a comprehensive attempt at multilateral reform. In 2017, Working Group III at the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) was entrusted with a broad, open-ended and problem driven mandate. The reform process aims to tackle particular concerns with ISDS: excessive costs and lengthy proceedings, inconsistent and incorrect decisions, and a lack of arbitral diversity and independence. The exclusion of substantive treaty reform has met critique but states are considering a wide range of procedural options from incremental reform to a multilateral court, appellate mechanism, and ISDS alternatives. In this article, we introduce the reform process and the seven articles that follow in this Special Issue of the Journal on World and Investment and Trade. In these contributions, ISDS Academic Forum members analyse the basis for each concern and the potential contribution of leading reform models.
American Journal of International Law (AJIL) - Unbound, 2020
In this essay, we examine empirically whether the revised draft of the business and human rights ... more In this essay, we examine empirically whether the revised draft of the business and human rights (BHR) treaty is a normative advance on the existing jungle of global instruments. Since the 1970s, almost one hundred global corporate social responsibility (CSR) standards have been adopted, half of them addressing human rights - as we established in our global CSR database. What is novel about the current treaty-drafting process within the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) is that it aims to develop a comprehensive standard that would hold states legally accountable for regulating business. The question is whether this is possible. Drawing on our work on the “commitment curve,” we begin theoretically and point out why one should hold modest expectations about the process and treat strong text with skepticism as much as celebration. Using an empirical methodology, we then compare the HRC’s Revised Draft Legally Binding Instrument (Revised Draft LBI) with existing standards, and find that while the draft contains a healthy dose of incremental pragmatism, its significant advances require a degree of circumspection about its strengths and prospects.
Edited by Malcolm Langford and S. Fukuda-Parr
American Journal of International Law - Unbound, 2020
Enthusiasm abounds about the potential of artificial intelligence to automate public decision-mak... more Enthusiasm abounds about the potential of artificial intelligence to automate public decision-making. The rise of machine learning and computational text analysis together with the proliferation of digital platforms has raised the prospect of “robo-judging” and “robo-administrators.” From a human rights perspective, the reaction has been mixed, and on balance negative. Optimists herald the possibilities of democratizing legal services and making decision-making more predictable and efficient. Critics warn, however, of the specter of new forms of social control, arbitrariness, and inequality. This essay examines the concerns over the turn to automation from the perspective of two international human rights: the rights to social security and a fair trial. It argues that while the critiques deserve a full hearing, they should be evidence-based, informed by an understanding of “technological systems,” and cognizant of the trade-offs between human and machine failure.
Uploads
Books by Malcolm Langford
One glaring omission in the comparative/historical studies is the Nordic region. These states present a potential challenge to the Legal Complex hypothesis, particularly claims that it is of ‘universal application’ (Halliday, Karpik and Feeley, 2008). Sitting atop most global indexes on core civil rights (and political/social rights), the Nordic states seem curiously devoid of a visible legal fraternity; representing the almost antithesis of turbocharged American legal adversarialism (Hirschl, 2011; Kagan, 2001). This project therefore sets out to examine whether such Nordic exceptionalism exists, with a focus on key moments in Nordic political liberalism. In so doing, it seeks to avoid, however, the typical Panglossian trappings of Nordic exceptionalist literature, prone to a reification of Nordic cultural trappings, an occlusion of the diversity of domestic actors and part political construction of the Nordic brand, and the conflation of diverging trajectories amongst the Nordic countries (for critiques along these lines, see Barker, 2012; Browning, 2007; Langford and Karlsson Schaffer, 2013).
This is a collaborative project between the University of California, Berkeley and the University of Oslo (NCHR’s Human Rights and Constitutionalism Group).
This book project sets out to better understand the causes, function, impact and legitimacy of international adjudication as an emerging site of struggle over sexual and reproductive rights. It is a part of PluriCourts - The Centre for the Study of the Legitimate Roles of the Judiciary in the Global Order, a Centre of Research Excellence at the Faculty of Law, University of Oslo. Pluricourts analyses the legitimacy of expanding international adjudication from legal, political science and philosophical perspectives through empirical studies of the origins, functions and effects of international courts and tribunals and their interrelationship with political and legal theory.
Journal Articles by Malcolm Langford
One glaring omission in the comparative/historical studies is the Nordic region. These states present a potential challenge to the Legal Complex hypothesis, particularly claims that it is of ‘universal application’ (Halliday, Karpik and Feeley, 2008). Sitting atop most global indexes on core civil rights (and political/social rights), the Nordic states seem curiously devoid of a visible legal fraternity; representing the almost antithesis of turbocharged American legal adversarialism (Hirschl, 2011; Kagan, 2001). This project therefore sets out to examine whether such Nordic exceptionalism exists, with a focus on key moments in Nordic political liberalism. In so doing, it seeks to avoid, however, the typical Panglossian trappings of Nordic exceptionalist literature, prone to a reification of Nordic cultural trappings, an occlusion of the diversity of domestic actors and part political construction of the Nordic brand, and the conflation of diverging trajectories amongst the Nordic countries (for critiques along these lines, see Barker, 2012; Browning, 2007; Langford and Karlsson Schaffer, 2013).
This is a collaborative project between the University of California, Berkeley and the University of Oslo (NCHR’s Human Rights and Constitutionalism Group).
This book project sets out to better understand the causes, function, impact and legitimacy of international adjudication as an emerging site of struggle over sexual and reproductive rights. It is a part of PluriCourts - The Centre for the Study of the Legitimate Roles of the Judiciary in the Global Order, a Centre of Research Excellence at the Faculty of Law, University of Oslo. Pluricourts analyses the legitimacy of expanding international adjudication from legal, political science and philosophical perspectives through empirical studies of the origins, functions and effects of international courts and tribunals and their interrelationship with political and legal theory.
on multiple disciplines, it fi ds signifi cant variance in outcomes and
reveals both spectacular successes and failures in making social rights a reality on the ground. Th is variance is strikingly similar to that found in
previous studies on civil rights, and the key explanatory factors lie in the
political calculus of defendants and the remedial framework. The book also discusses which strategies have enhanced implementation and focuses on judicial reflexivity, alliance building, and social mobilisation .