Treść książki
Przejdź do opcji czytnikaPrzejdź do nawigacjiPrzejdź do informacjiPrzejdź do stopki
ChapterI
ThePhenomenonofNegotiations
Inordertoanswerthequestionastowhywehavedecided
towriteabookonthelart’oflegalnegotiation(thetermlart’has
beenusedrathermoreforaestheticreasonsthanpertainingtothe
content),oneshouldconsiderfirstadifferent,and,inourview,key
problem:whoshould,ultimately,thecontemporarylawyerbe?Should
sheratherbecomeaformalistspecializedinsomebranchofthelaw
orprimarilyanegotiator?Thisageolddiscussion,bothinlegaltheory
andlegalpractice,hasprovideduswithnodefiniteanswers.Usually,
twodiametricallydifferentwaysofthinkingaboutthelawhavebeen
propounded:thepositivistandthenon-positivist.Forthesupport-
ersofpositivism,lawisalfixedvalue’evenwhenitfailstomeetthe
mostbasicrequirementsofrightness,efficacyoreconomicefficiency.
Legalismandthepredictabilityofthelaw,whenformallyunder-
stood,areconsideredsufficientreasonstojustifythegapbetween
legaldecisionsandthefacts.Ontheotherhand,therepresentatives
ofnon-positivismseethepossibilityofadynamicinterpretationofthe
law,onethatenablesthetailoringoflegalprovisionstoaneverchang-
ingreality.Theyclaimthattheultimatesenseoflegalnormsshould
beestablishedthroughaprocessofdirectnegotiationbetweenthe
conflictingparties.Thisisthestanceweaccepthere.Itcanbefur-
therjustifiedwithanumberofarguments,includingonepertaining
tothenatureofongoingcivilizationalchanges.Theworldhaslgone
offtherails’,acceleratedoutofcontroland,accordingtosome,has
evengonemad.Onlythelawremainsunruffled,maintainingitsli-
9
