OXFORD CONSTITUTIONAL THEORY Series Editors: Martin Loughlin, John P. McCormick, and Neil Walker Fault Lines of Globalization OXFORD CONSTITUTIONAL THEORY Series Editors: Martin Loughlin, John P. McCormick, and Neil Walker One consequence of the increase in interest in constitutions and constitutional law in recent years is a growing innovative literature in constitutional theory. The aim of O xford Constitutional Theory is to provide a showcase for the best of these theoretical refl ections and a forum for further innovation in the fi eld. The new series will seek to establish itself as the primary point of reference for scholarly work in the subject by commissioning diff erent types of study. The majority of the works published in the series will be monographs that advance new understandings of the subject. Well-conceived edited collections that bring a variety of perspectives and disciplinary approaches to bear on specifi c themes in constitutional thought will also be included. Further, in recognition of the fact that there is a great deal of pioneering literature originally written in languages other than English and with regard to non- anglophone constitutional traditions, the series will also seek to publish English translations of leading monographs in constitutional theory. ALSO AVAILABLE IN THE SERIES Beyond Constitutionalism The Pluralist Structure of Postnational Law Nico Krisch The Constitutional State N. W. Barber Sovereignty’s Promise The State as Fiduciary Evan Fox-Decent Constitutional Fragments Societal Constitutionalism and Globalization Gunther Teubner Constitutional Referendums The Theory and Practice of Republican Deliberation Stephen Tierney Constituting Economic and Social Rights Katharine G. Young The Global Model of Constitutional Rights Kai Möller The Three Branches A Comparative Model of Separation of Powers Christoph Möllers The Cosmopolitan State H. Patrick Glenn Fault Lines of Globalization Legal Order and the Politics of A-Legality Hans Lindahl (cid:2) (cid:3) 1 3 Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, OX2 6DP, United Kingdom Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries © H. Lindahl 2013 The moral rights of the author have been asserted First Edition published in 2013 Impression: 1 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted by law, by licence or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the address above You must not circulate this work in any other form and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer Crown copyright material is reproduced under Class Licence Number C01P0000148 with the permission of OPSI and the Queen’s Printer for Scotland Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press 198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data Data available Library of Congress Control Number: 2013939688 ISBN 978–0–19–960168–4 Printed and bound in Great Britain by CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon, CR0 4YY Links to third party websites are provided by Oxford in good faith and for information only. Oxford disclaims any responsibility for the materials contained in any third party website referenced in this work. Voor Annemarie This page intentionally left blank Acknowledgments Every book is a collective endeavour. This one is no exception; it has profi ted immeasurably from the comments, both generous and searching, of many col- leagues and friends. The fi rst draft of Chapters 1–3 was written during a fi ve month research fel- lowship in 2010 at the Stellenbosch Institute for Advanced Study, in South Africa. I am grateful to its director, Hendrik Geyer, for his gracious hospitality and inter- est during those wonderfully stimulating months at STIAS. Intense discussions with André van der Walt, Henk Botha, and Philippe van Houte, during my stay in South Africa, were very helpful in mapping out the main lines of the book. I cherish the memories of the times spent together with Paul Cilliers, who unex- pectedly passed away after I returned to the Netherlands. Several audiences have discussed parts of the manuscript with me in the course of drafting and redrafting it, and I refer to them in chronological (and alphabeti- cal) order: members of the research seminar series of the Centre of Criminology at the University of Cape Town, with special thanks to Cliff ord Shearing; mem- bers of the Law Department of the London School of Economics and Political Science, with special thanks to Martin Loughlin, Emmanuel Melissaris, Grégoire Webber, and Michael Wilkinson; members of the Department of Philosophy and of the Law Faculty of the Universidad del Rosario, in Colombia, with special thanks to Beira Aguilar, Adolfo Chaparro, Camila de Gamboa, Wilson Herrera, and Iván Mahecha; the research group of legal theory of the VU University Amsterdam, with special thanks to Luigi Corrias, Lyana Francot, Bart van Klink, Nanda Oudejans, Irena Rosenthal, Wouter Veraart, and Wouter Werner; partici- pants at the Transnational Societal Constitutionalism Conference in Turin, with special thanks to Riccardo Prandini and Gunther Teubner; the research group of international law at Lund University, with special thanks to Matilda Arvidsson, Markus Gunnefl o, Gregor Noll, and Aleksandra Popovic; the research group of legal theory at Glasgow University, with special thanks to Emilios Christodoulidis and George Pavlakos; the Grundlegung research seminar of the Faculty of Philosophy at the University of Groningen, with special thanks to Martin van Hees, Frank Hindriks, and Pauline Kleingeld; the Centre for Law and Society at the University of Edinburgh, with special thanks to Cormac Mac Amhlaigh, Christine Bell, Euan MacDonald, Claudio Mechelon, Stephen Tierney, and Neil Walker; the Centre for Political Philosophy at Leiden University, with special thanks to Thomas Fossen and Herman Siemens; a Law and Theory Centre semi- nar at the University of Westminster, with special thanks to Hendrik Anderson, Victoria Brooks, Julia Chryssostalis, Peter Fitzpatrick, Stuart Motha, Chantal (cid:2) viii Acknowledgments Mouff e, Andreas Philippopoulous-Mihalopoulos, and Patricia Tuitt; and a semi- nar with the law and jurisprudence PhD candidates of Finland, with special thanks to Julen Etxabe, Ida Koivisto, Panu Minkkinen, and Kimmo Nuotio. I appreciate detailed comments to the second draft of the entire manuscript by Bernhard Waldenfels, whose contribution to a phenomenology of strangeness has been an important source of inspiration for this book, and by Jacco Verburgt, whose remarks and suggestions have helped me considerably to tighten up the argument I am making. It has been a joy to work closely with the participants in the research seminars of legal philosophy at Tilburg University; their encouragement and incisive ques- tioning during the seminars dedicated to the manuscript have greatly improved it. I am grateful to all of them: Daniel Augenstein, Michiel Besters, Morag Goodwin, Sean Gould, Ivana Ivkovic, David Janssens, Quoc Loc Hong, Desire Nizigiyimana, Philip Paiement, Chiara Raucea, Umberto Sconfi enza, and Alan Thomas. I am particularly grateful to Bert van Roermund, the former professor of legal philosophy at Tilburg, for his unstinting support during these years; this book bears witness to how much I have learnt from his pioneering contributions to legal philosophy. This book is dedicated to Annemarie ter Veer, whose support, humour, and patience during the process of writing it mean more to me than what I can put into writing. This book builds on earlier published material of mine, even though the fi nal result has taken me in directions I could not have envisaged when I began to write it in June 2010. It is appropriate to acknowledge these sources. I am grateful to the copyright holders for the permissions to republish. In particular, Chapter 1 expands on and revises my article, ‘Boundaries and the concept of legal order’, published in J urisprudence: An International Journal of Legal and Political Thought 2, no. 1 (2011), 73–97. Portions of chapters 2 and 3 draw on my article, ‘We and Cyberlaw: Constitutionalism and the Inclusion/Exclusion Diff erence’, published in the I ndiana Journal of Global Legal Studies 20, no. 2 (forthcoming). Portions of chapters 2 and 7 draw on my article, ‘A-Legality: Postnationalism and the Question of Legal Boundaries’, published in the M odern Law Review 73, no. 1 (2010), 30–56. Part of a section of chapter 2 builds on my article, ‘Inside and Outside the EU’s “Area of Freedom, Security and Justice”: Refl exive Identity and the Unity of Legal Space’, published in Archiv für Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie 90, no. 4 (2004), 478–497. A section of chapter 3 fl eshes out ideas initially outlined in ‘Discretion and Public Policy: Timing the Unity and Diversity of Legal Orders’, published in Sacha Prechal and Bert van Roermund (eds.), The Coherence of EU Law: The Search for Unity in Divergent Concepts (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008), 291–313 (by permission of Oxford University Press). A section of chapter 4 builds on my arti- cle, ‘Constituent Power and Refl exive Identity: Towards an Ontology of Collective Selfhood’, published in Martin Loughlin and Neil Walker (eds.), T he Paradox of Constituent Power: Constituent Power and Constitutional Form (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007), 9–24 (by permission of Oxford University Press). Part of a section of chapter 5 draws on my article, ‘Dialectic and Revolution: Confronting Kelsen and Gadamer on Legal Interpretation’, published in C ardozo Law Review 24, (cid:3) Acknowledgments ix no. 2 (2003), 769–798. A section of chapter 5 presents a strongly abridged version of the argument developed in ‘Recognition as Domination: Constitutionalism, Reciprocity and the Problem of Singularity’, published in Neil Walker, Jo Shaw, and Stephen Tierney (eds.), E urope's Constitutional Mosaic (Oxford: Hart, 2011), 205–230. Portions of chapter 6 build on ideas initially presented in my arti- cles, ‘Finding a Place for Freedom, Security and Justice: The European Union’s Claim to Territorial Unity’, published in E uropean Law Review 29, no. 4 (2004), 461–484, and ‘Acquiring a Community: The Acquis and the Institution of European Legal Order’, published in European Law Journal 9, no. 4 (2003), 433–450. The fi nal section of chapter 6 draws on ideas presented in ‘Breaking Promises to Keep Them: Immigration and the Boundaries of Distributive Justice’, published in Hans Lindahl (ed.), A Right to Inclusion and Exclusion? Normative Fault Lines of the EU’s Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (Oxford: Hart, 2009), 137–159. Finally, a section of chapter 7 draws on my article, ‘In Between: Immigration, Distributive Justice, and Political Dialogue’, published (in truncated form) in Contemporary Political Theory 8, no. 4 (2009), 415–434. Tilburg, March 2013