the legal order that they are included in. This bolsters the legitimacy of
normative authority and decreases the authority deficit. Brazil (we speaker)
that claims to represent and regulate Brazillian workers (we at stake), could
allow for other legitimate representatives of the we at stake (GBI and WBCSD)
to participate in the we author process, so that the we at stake can see
themselves as included in the rules to which they are subject. Through this
WBCSD’s framework, the we at stake can stage their claim for better
recognition. A collective can also defer decisions about the default setting of
(il)legality, which stages the struggle between different representations about
what is common to joint action. Review of administrative decisions as
possible in GAL falls within the scope of this mode of deferral.
4. Learning Goal: Understand and apply how the distinctions between unity/plurality
and identity/difference are at work in struggles for representation and recognition
in a global context
a) Might a global order of corporate human rights obligations offer a once-and-for-all
solution to the normative problem of authority of global economic-legal orders?
(Maximum 300 words)
b) Why is asymmetrical recognition a pluralist account of legal authority?
(Maximum 300 words)
4. .
a. If a legal order is never finished/definitive (ordo ordinatus), but always an
“order-in-the-making”/process (ordo ordinans), it is unlikely that a once-and-
for-all solution to the problem of normative authority is possible.10 A legal
10
Hans Lindahl, ‘Inside and Outside Global Law (2019) 41 SydLawRw 1 1, 14
normative authority and decreases the authority deficit. Brazil (we speaker)
that claims to represent and regulate Brazillian workers (we at stake), could
allow for other legitimate representatives of the we at stake (GBI and WBCSD)
to participate in the we author process, so that the we at stake can see
themselves as included in the rules to which they are subject. Through this
WBCSD’s framework, the we at stake can stage their claim for better
recognition. A collective can also defer decisions about the default setting of
(il)legality, which stages the struggle between different representations about
what is common to joint action. Review of administrative decisions as
possible in GAL falls within the scope of this mode of deferral.
4. Learning Goal: Understand and apply how the distinctions between unity/plurality
and identity/difference are at work in struggles for representation and recognition
in a global context
a) Might a global order of corporate human rights obligations offer a once-and-for-all
solution to the normative problem of authority of global economic-legal orders?
(Maximum 300 words)
b) Why is asymmetrical recognition a pluralist account of legal authority?
(Maximum 300 words)
4. .
a. If a legal order is never finished/definitive (ordo ordinatus), but always an
“order-in-the-making”/process (ordo ordinans), it is unlikely that a once-and-
for-all solution to the problem of normative authority is possible.10 A legal
10
Hans Lindahl, ‘Inside and Outside Global Law (2019) 41 SydLawRw 1 1, 14
