Histoire et droit : rivalité ou complémentarité ?

Cartier, Emmanuel

doi:10.3917/rfdc.067.0509

Cited by 5 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Through this law, it is observed that the legislator may seek to apply different constraints, since it had previously been demonstrated that Article 4 illustrates the exercise of a prescriptive constraint. Article 1 is limited to recognising ‘the dramatic character of the events and of the offence committed by the French State’ (Cartier, 2006: 528).…”

Section: The Exercise Of Latent Indirect Constraintsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Official memories and legal constraints: A classification of memory instruments in France and Belgium

Grandjean

2019

Memory Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public authorities do not have a monopoly over memory constraint in the sense that they are not alone in promoting collective memories. However, the article suggests a classification of the memory instruments in France and Belgium according to the degree of legal constraint (sanctioning, prescriptive and latent). This classification offers a new understanding of the exercise of the legal constraints which are a way for the public authorities to offer specific accounts of certain past events.

show abstract

Section: The Exercise Of Latent Indirect Constraintsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Official memories and legal constraints: A classification of memory instruments in France and Belgium

Grandjean

2019

Memory Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The Birth of the Crime of Historical Denialism

Fronza

2018

International Criminal Justice Series

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Judicial “Truth” and Historical “Truth”: The Case of the Ardeatine Caves Massacre

Resta¹,

Zeno-Zencovich²

2013

Law hist. rev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is frequently claimed that adjudication before a court of law and historical adjudication are two entirely different tasks. The methods and techniques employed by judges and historians contrast sharply. The judge faces many constraints, in terms of choice of subject matter, the arguments to be considered, the evidence to be evaluated, the procedural steps to be followed, the substantive rules to be applied, and the time available to reach a decision; historians, by contrast, are relatively free to choose their field of research, manage their own time, gather the evidence, evaluate it, decide when findings are ready to be published, and reexamine them.

show abstract

Histoire et droit : rivalité ou complémentarité ?

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

Official memories and legal constraints: A classification of memory instruments in France and Belgium

Official memories and legal constraints: A classification of memory instruments in France and Belgium

The Birth of the Crime of Historical Denialism

Judicial “Truth” and Historical “Truth”: The Case of the Ardeatine Caves Massacre

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About