Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-30T16:37:28.924Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Judicial navigation as official law meets culture in Turkey

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 July 2008

Esin Örücü
Esin Örücü*
Affiliation:
Honorary Senior Research Fellow and Professor Emerita of Comparative Law, University of Glasgow and Professor Emerita of Comparative Law, Erasmus University, Rotterdam1
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article aims to assess the work of the courts as navigators when law meets culture in Turkey, where the culture of the official legal system and the culture of the people do not always accord. First the conceptual framework used is analysed, then readers are introduced to the peculiarities of Turkish law and socioculture, and finally, the work of the judge is considered. Selected cases are in three groups: cases where courts face culture contrary to the vision embodied in the official legal framework; then, where courts face culture which can be catered for within the legal framework, though not in keeping with it, and now need revision because of the aspired European Union membership; and finally, where courts face demands of further Europeanisation and human rights law from the outside, which may or may not fit in the framework or the traditional values of the people.

Type
Research Article
Information
International Journal of Law in Context , Volume 4 , Issue 1 , March 2008 , pp. 35 - 61
Copyright
Cambridge University Press 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ascherson, Neal (1996) Black Sea. London: Vintage.Google Scholar
Ajani, Gianmaria (1994) ‘La Circulation de Modèles Juridiques Dans le Droit Post-Socialiste’, R.I.D.C. 4: 1087–1105.Google Scholar
Arin, Canan (2001) ‘Femicide in the Name of Honor in Turkey’, Violence Against Women 7: 824.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bussani, Mauro (2000) ‘“Integrative” Comparative Law Enterprises and the Inner Stratification of Legal Systems’, European Review of Private Law 1: 85–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chiba, Masaji (ed.) (1986) Asian Indigenous Law in Interaction with Received Law. London: KPI.Google Scholar
Chiba, Masaji (1989) Legal Pluralism: Towards a General Theory through Japanese Legal Culture. Tokyo: Tokai University Press.Google Scholar
De sousa santos, Boaventura (2002) Toward a New Common Sense: Law, Science and Politics in the Paradigmatic Transition (2nd edn). London: Butterworths.Google Scholar
Featherstone, Mike (1995) Undoing Culture: Globalization, Postmodernism and Identity. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Fitzpatrick, Peter (2000) ‘Globalisation and the Humanity of Rights’, Law, Social Justice and Global Development, available at: http://elj.warwick.ac.uk/global/issue/2000-1/fitzpatrick.html: 1–18.Google Scholar
Gessner, Volkmar (1994) ‘Global Legal Integration and Legal Cultures’, Ratio Juris, 7: 132–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gladwin, Thomas (1964) ‘Cultures and Logical Process’ in Goodenough, Ward (ed.) Explorations in Cultural Anthropology: Essays in Honour of George Peter Murdock. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Griffiths, John (1986) ‘What is Legal Pluralism?’ Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law 24: 1–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hannerz, Ulf (1990) ‘Cosmopolitans and Locals in World Culture’ in Featherstone, Mike (ed.) Global Culture: Nationalism, Globalization and Modernity. London: Sage, 237–51.Google Scholar
Howard, Rhoda (1993) ‘Cultural Absolutism and the Nostalgia for the Community’, Human Rights Quarterly 15: 315–38.Google Scholar
Kinross, Lord (1964) Atatürk – The Birth of a Nation. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.Google Scholar
Lash, Scott and Urry, John (1994) Economics of Signs and Space. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Lewis, Geoffrey (1974) Modern Turkey (4th edn). London: Ernest Benn Ltd.Google Scholar
Monateri, Pierguiseppe (1998) ‘The “Weak” Law: Contaminations and Legal Cultures’ in Italian National Reports to the XVI International Congress of Comparative Law. Milan: Giuffre editore, 83–110.Google Scholar
örücü, Esin (1987–88) ‘Turkey: Reconciling Traditional Society and Secular Demands’, Journal of Family Law 26: 221–36.Google Scholar
örücü, Esin (1992) ‘The Impact of European Law on the Ottoman Empire and Turkey’ in Wolfgang, J. Mommsen and Jan, A. de Moor (eds) European Expansion and Law. Oxford: Berg Publishers, 39–57.Google Scholar
örücü, Esin (1995) ‘A Theoretical Framework for Transfrontier Mobility of Law’ in Rob Jagtenberg, Esin Örücü and Annie, de Roo (eds) Transfrontier Mobility of Law. The Hague: Kluwer Law International, 5–18.Google Scholar
örücü, Esin (1996) ‘Turkey: Change Under Pressure’ in Esin, Örücü, Elspeth, Attwooll and Sean, Coyle (eds) Studies in Legal Systems: Mixed and Mixing. London: Kluwer Law International, 89–112.Google Scholar
örücü, Esin (1999) Critical Comparative Law: Considering Paradoxes for Legal Systems in Transition. Nederlanse Vereniging voor Rechtsvergelijking No. 59. Deventer: Kluwer Law International.Google Scholar
örücü, Esin (2000) ‘Turkey Facing the European Union – Old and New Harmonies’, European Law Review 25: 57–71.Google Scholar
örücü, Esin (2002) ‘Law as Transposition’ International and Comparative Law Quarterly 51: 205–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
örücü, Esin (2003) ‘Comparatists and Extraordinary Places’ in Pierre, Legrand and Roderick, Munday (eds) Comparative Legal Studies: Traditions and Transitions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 467–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
örücü, Esin (2006a) ‘A Synthetic and Hyphenated Legal System: The Turkish Experience’ The Journal of Comparative Law 1(2): 27–47.Google Scholar
örücü, Esin (2006b) ‘The Story of Adultery in Turkey’ in Bainham, Andrew (ed.) The International Survey of Family Law. Bristol: Jordan Publishing, 469–80.Google Scholar
Robertson, Roland (1992) Globalization: Social Theory and Global Culture. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Robertson, Roland (1995) ‘Glocalization: Time–Space and Homogeneity–Heterogeneity’ in Mike, Featherstone, Scott, Lash and Roland, Roberston (eds) Global Modernities. London: Sage, 25–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smits, Jan M. (1998) ‘Systems Mixing and in Transition: Import and Export of Legal Models: The Dutch Experience’ in Hondius, Ewoud H. (ed.) Nederlands Reports to the Fifteenth International Congress of Comparative Law. Antwerp, Groningen: Intersentia Rechtswetenschappen, 47–69.Google Scholar
Twining, William (2000) ‘Comparative Law and Legal Theory: The Country and Western Tradition’ in Edge, Ian (ed.) Comparative Law in Global Perspective. Ardsley, NY: Transnational, 21–76.Google Scholar
Watson, Alan (1974) Legal Transplants: An Approach to Comparative Law. Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press.Google Scholar
Yilmaz, İhsan (2003) ‘Non-recognition of Post-modern Turkish Socio-legal Reality and the Predicament of Women’, British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies 30(1): 25–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yilmaz, İhsan (2005) Muslim Laws, Politics and Society in Modern Nation States: Dynamic Legal Pluralism in England, Turkey and Pakistan. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar