The Paradox of Performative Immediacy: Law, Music, Improvisation

In a 1999 essay, J.M. Balkin and Sanford Levinson called for law to be considered as a performing art. Against or perhaps going further than Balkin and Levinson, this commentary claims that while engagement with performance practices in the arts, such as music, is of the utmost value to law and legal theory, we must not take for granted what it means to ‘‘perform’’. Uniting Jacques Derrida’s la Villette performance (with jazz legend, Ornette Coleman) with his writings on performativity in law, this commentary looks to the musical practice of improvisation to trouble the notion of performance as immediate and singular and to question taken for granted distinctions between text and performance, writing and music, composition and improvisation. The consequence of this refined understanding of the performative on legal theory and the actual practice of law is a reconceptualization of law as improvisation, that is, both singular and general, pre-existent and immediate, and a refocusing on the creativity that lies at the heart of law’s conservativism.

Offshoring Clinical Trials: The Mutable Ethics, Weak Protections and Vulnerable Subjects of EU Law

In this paper I engage with science and technology studies work on pharmaceuticalisation to explore how European Union (EU) law helps to produce and support the preference for pharmaceutical responses in public health governance, while authorising the production of vulnerable subjects through the growing off-shoring of clinical trials. Drawing on the analysis of legal and policy documents, I demonstrate how EU law allows and legitimates the use of data procured from vulnerable subjects abroad for market authorisation and corporate profitability at home. This is possible because the EU has (de)selected international ethical frameworks in order to support the continued and growing use of clinical trials data from abroad. This has helped to stimulate the revision of international ethical frameworks in light of market needs, inscribing EU public health law within specific politics (that often remained obscured by the joint workings of legal and technological discourses). I suggest that law operates as part of a broader ‘technology’ – encompassing ethics and human rights discourses – that functions to optimise life through resort to market reasoning. Law is thereby reoriented, instrumentalised and deployed as part of a broader project aimed at (re)defining and limiting the boundaries of the EU's responsibility for public health, including the broader social production of public health problems and the unequal global order that the EU represents and helps to depoliticise and perpetuate. Overall, this limits the EU's responsibility and accountability for these failures, as well as another: the weak and mutable protections and insecure legacies for vulnerable trial subjects abroad.

Corporate Mechanisms and the Presumption of Accountability

This paper seeks to draw out this focus on form in British public administration reform by focusing on the role that the idea of the corporate form has played in reform. Drawing on the codification of Foundation Trusts in the English NHS, I argue that, while accountability ought to be considered as a 'social space' in which conduct conducive to particular interests emerges, reformers tend to regard accountability as a function of appropriate procedures and forms. The turn to the corporate form relies on a hope that it will deliver various 'accountability' benefits will emerge. This hope, I argue, is misplaced

Incorporation of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child in Law: A Comparative Review

Incorporation in law is recognised as key to the implementation of the UNCRC. This article considers the ways in which a variety of countries have chosen to incorporate the CRC, drawing on a study conducted by the authors for UNICEF-UK. It categorises the different approaches adopted into examples of direct incorporation (where the CRC forms part of domestic law) and indirect incorporation (where there are legal obligations which encourage its incorporation); and full incorporation (where the CRC has been wholly incorporated in law) and partial incorporation (where elements of the CRC have been incorporated). Drawing on evidence and interviews conducted during field visits in six of the countries studied, it concludes that children’s rights are better protected – at least in law if not also in practice – in countries that have given legal status to the CRC in a systematic way and have followed this up by establishing the necessary systems to support, monitor and enforce the implementation of CRC rights.

Clinical Trials Abroad: The Marketable Ethics, Weak Protections and Vulnerable Subjects of EU Law

This chapter explores how the EU is a largely overlooked exporter of normative power through its facilitation and use of clinical trials data produced abroad for the marketing of safe pharmaceuticals at home; a move that helps to foster the growing resort to pharmaceuticals as a fix for public health problems. This is made possible by the EU’s (de)selection of international ethical frameworks in preference to the international technical standards it co-authors with other global regulators. Clinical trials abroad underscore how ethics are contingent and revisable in light of market needs, producing weak protections for the vulnerable subjects of EU law. I argue that these components and effects of the regime are ultimately about that which undergirds, shapes and directs regulatory design. That is, I point to the use, infiltration, perpetuation and extension of market-oriented ideas, values and rationalities into formally non-market domains like biomedical knowledge production and public health. I explain how these are central to efforts at producing and legitimating the EU, its related imagined socio-political order based on a more innovative, profitable and competitive pharmaceutical sector in order to foster economic growth, jobs and prosperity, and with them the project of European integration. ‘Bioethics as risk’ is highlighted as a way to reshape and redirect the regulatory regime in ways that are more consistent with the spirit and letter of the ethical standards (and through them the human rights) the EU claims to uphold.