Nina Leijon says:

This brilliant expose of the complex interaction between law and society (and of the role of law in society) relies predominantly on North American material, but the questions posed by Bogart about the consequences of getting the balance wrong are universal. The book reflects on big questions: what are the objectives of law? Can, and should, law transform social and political relationships? Is its purpose to reflect societal standards by codifying accepted norms, or is it to progress and develop a society towards greater enlightenment?

The answers naturally depend on one’s own ideology in part. Bogart uses environmental law as an example of the political dichotomy: the Left argues that current US environmental regulation doesn’t go far enough in achieving change, while the Right believes the law has already gone too far.

If the usefulness of law is contested, why then have Western societies seen such a proliferation of legislation in recent decades? Bogart has two explanations. The first is the breakdown of other rules and norms in society, with law becoming a necessary subsitute to civic engagement (drawing on Putnam’s ‘Bowling Alone’ argument). The second views legislation as supplanting politics across the ideological spectrum: with faith in government on the decline, law is increasingly seen as the means to achieve particular short-term goals. In the US the result, Bogart argues, has been an obsession with in particular individual rights that has trumped other values and created a ‘culture of complaint’. Adversarial litigation and the criminalization of behaviour have become preferred vehicles to respond to complex societal and human problems, with liberal pluralism and alternative mechanisms for problem solving (persuasion, negotiation, exchange, rewards and design to mention but a few) on the backfoot.

Bogart turns to international law to demonstrate the unintended consequences of relying on sticks over carrots. Sanctions against ‘rogue’ states have had limited effectiveness, in particular when those embargoes suffer from the ‘termination trap’ of lacking an end date. A telling example is the sanctions against Serbia that led to a surge in organised crime on the black market that protected the elite whilst devastating the lives of the poor, in particularly women and children.

Bogart offers plenty of reflection, if few solutions. His criticism of the current over-reliance on legalistic solutions is implicit throughout the book, though at the end he accepts that we get the kind of society we deserve. The quip by Gilmore (1997) neatly sums it up: “In Hell there will be nothing but law, and due process will be meticulously observed”.

(BTW, the photo of the book cover featured on the Amazon site is waay, way wrong – this book has nothing to do with men and mothering).
Rating: 5 / 5