Search

This article intends to analyze the contribution of Étienne Le Roy’s theory of multijuridism to the understanding of mediation. Thus, considering that this author associates mediation with what he calls “juridicity”, a brief allusion will be made to the distinction, proposed by him, between “law” and “juridicity”. Next, we will focus the conceptual design given to the mediation by Étienne Le Roy, with special emphasis on the progressive acquisition of centrality that it receives in his theory. After that, having as a horizon the notion of juridicity, the article focusses the author’s thesis on mediation as a “pivotal and dialogal concept of the global regulation of societies”. Finally, in conclusive terms, it will be emphasized how a more accurate consideration of the anthropological approach can contribute to the understanding of the complexity assumed by the contemporary legal regulation and, in particular, of the mediation., Este artigo pretende analisar os aportes da teoria do multijuridismo de Étienne Le Roy para a compreensão da mediação. Assim, considerando que esse autor associa a mediação ao que ele designa de “juridicidade”, será realizada, em primeiro lugar, uma breve alusão à distinção entre “direito” e “juridicidade” por ele proposta. Em seguida, será focalizado o delineamento conceitual dado à mediação por Étienne Le Roy, com especial ênfase na progressiva aquisição de centralidade que esta recebe em seu pensamento. A partir daí, tendo por horizonte a noção de juridicidade, será enfocada a tese do autor acerca da mediação como um “conceito-pivô e dialogal da regulação global das sociedades”. Finalmente, em termos conclusivos, procurar-se-á sublinhar o quanto uma consideração mais apurada dos aportes antropológicos pode contribuir para a compreensão da complexidade assumida pela regulação jurídica contemporânea e, em particular, da mediação.

This article intends to analyze the contribution of Étienne Le Roy’s theory of multijuridism to the understanding of mediation. Thus, considering that this author associates mediation with what he calls “juridicity”, a brief allusion will be made to the distinction, proposed by him, between “law” and “juridicity”. Next, we will focus the conceptual design given to the mediation by Étienne Le Roy, with special emphasis on the progressive acquisition of centrality that it receives in his theory. After that, having as a horizon the notion of juridicity, the article focusses the author’s thesis on mediation as a “pivotal and dialogal concept of the global regulation of societies”. Finally, in conclusive terms, it will be emphasized how a more accurate consideration of the anthropological approach can contribute to the understanding of the complexity assumed by the contemporary legal regulation and, in particular, of the mediation., Este artigo pretende analisar os aportes da teoria do multijuridismo de Étienne Le Roy para a compreensão da mediação. Assim, considerando que esse autor associa a mediação ao que ele designa de “juridicidade”, será realizada, em primeiro lugar, uma breve alusão à distinção entre “direito” e “juridicidade” por ele proposta. Em seguida, será focalizado o delineamento conceitual dado à mediação por Étienne Le Roy, com especial ênfase na progressiva aquisição de centralidade que esta recebe em seu pensamento. A partir daí, tendo por horizonte a noção de juridicidade, será enfocada a tese do autor acerca da mediação como um “conceito-pivô e dialogal da regulação global das sociedades”. Finalmente, em termos conclusivos, procurar-se-á sublinhar o quanto uma consideração mais apurada dos aportes antropológicos pode contribuir para a compreensão da complexidade assumida pela regulação jurídica contemporânea e, em particular, da mediação.

Le pluralisme juridique est une approche théorique qui critique l’exclusivité du droit de l’État. Cependant, il existe autant de conceptions du pluralisme juridique que de penseurs pluralistes. Et les jeunes chercheurs qui désirent s’aventurer sur cette voie se retrouvent bien vite submergés par l’éventail de possibilités que leur offre cette école de pensée. Dans cette perspective, une analyse historique peut servir de première exploration empirique d’un objet de recherche. C’est ce que nous allons effectuer dans ce court essai, sur le terrain qui est le nôtre, soit l’est de la République démocratique du Congo (RDC). En RDC, il faut comprendre le pluralisme juridique comme la combinaison de différents systèmes normatifs superposés à des échelles différentes, lesquels se mélangent dans les pensées et les actions des individus. À une certaine porosité juridique s’ajoute donc le rôle des acteurs sociaux dans la production et la reproduction du droit. Et c’est le modèle du jeu que l’anthropologue français Étienne Le Roy a conçu qui nous permet de théoriser de manière adéquate tous ces éléments., Legal pluralism is a theoretical approach that criticizes State law exclusivity. However, there are as many conceptions of legal pluralism as pluralist thinkers. And young researchers who wish to venture on this path find themselves quickly overwhelmed by the range of possibilities offered by this school of thought. In this perspective, a historical analysis can serve as a first empirical exploration of a research topic. This is what I intent to do in this short essay, in the context of my field research, which is the Eastern region of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). In the DRC, we must understand legal pluralism as the combination of different normative systems superimposed on various scales, which blend into individual’s thoughts and actions. To a certain legal porosity is added social actors’ role in the production and reproduction of law. Thus, it is the model of the game, as developed by the French anthropologist Étienne Le Roy, that theorizes adequately all these elements.