Book Review: The Internationalization of Legal Education: The Future Practise of Law. Edited by William van Caenegem & Mary Hiscock

This astute book ¹ explores the acute remonstrance presented by the internationalization of law (IoL), a trend that has been accelerated by the growing requirement for academics and practitioners to work and research across countries and regions with differing legal traditions.* Rejecting the modern legal discourse, which prefers much of an outdated perspective, the present set of academics shows a trend of integrated theoretical and practical perspectives that wrestles with fundamental issues of law and legal education (LE). ² We have seen how at this moment litigation in domestic courts involves people, on both the bench and bar, who are trained in the same schools, have practised in the same legal regime for years and are, therefore, more familiar with the same legal culture, its specific practices and norms. At the domestic level, the parties are familiar with each other, whereas the same cannot be said for the players in international arbitration. There, the lawyers often deal with the ones from a totally different legal system, practice culture and working language, and whose values and understanding of legal principles are quite alien from theirs. The challenges raised by IoL can no longer be left to a small group of comparative and international lawyers, but rather require fundamental engagement from everyone in the law.

This book is a collection of 15 essays and a conclusion, divided into five parts, depicting a useful mix of intellectual and practical approaches to the topic. The parts are arranged in a narrative arc from the philosophical to the practical, thus drawing a well-defined attention in the world of LE responding to the globalization challenge. The book starts with a placed essay at the top, ³ paving a correct and a well-tuned approach for dwelling into the topic. It outlines the evidence for IoL, while discussing the objectives to be pursued by LE in response to globalization.

Part I of the book concentrates on the fundamental issues of IoL with peculiar national philosophies of values and culture with respect to LE. In the second essay of the book, ⁴ the author argues that the hard yards for IoL needs a detailed work on curricula. He opined that a focused programme which goes beyond mere book study of foreign legal systems with an objective of cultivating the growth and development of a new mindset about the study of law in a global environment is the key. ⁵ The next essay ⁶ highlights how internal pressure introduced through constitutional democracy and external influence of economic globalization induced changes of both endogenous and exogenous varieties in LE. Another essay ⁷ highlights how the debate of internationalization of the curriculum is far from over, especially concerning the lack of academic freedom available to the academics. In the fifth essay, ⁸ the authors make an ardent effort of exposing failures of reforms in the LE of Japan and how it continues to be a major obstacle to internationalizing curricula in law schools and preparing students for an internationalized legal market. ⁹ In the final essay of this part, ¹⁰ the author explores market’s approach towards LE and its systematic failure in the USA. The author at one place is of the view that IoL adds another layer of complexity and volatility in designing effective interventions that connect students with globalized opportunity. ¹¹ Justifying his argument, the author cites some stats from the USA, thereby arguing for the unease caused by IoL. ¹² However, the author was equally enthusiastic of the fact that IoL could be useful, simply because it unfreezes old presumptions and underlines the danger of teaching to ossified professional contexts.

Part II of the book raises concerns over the much divide between common law and civil law systems. Through the seventh essay, ¹³ the author addresses how both with the Internet and the spread of English as a lingua franca, efforts for harmonization and unification of LE are already at work. In another essay, ¹⁴ the author explains how the wind for LE has found a new destination, which is Asia. The author is of the view that with the ascendance of Asian economies and the consequential political elevation, teaching and inspiring students in an introductory comparative law course requires innovative pedagogical methods.

Part III of the book explores the evolving initiatives in LE for global practice. In the first essay under this part, ¹⁵ the author explains much tension prevailing in LE regarding academic pursuit and professional qualification. While exploring various jurisdictions, the author opined that LE must aspire the legal comity to do far more than to teach students what law is. Another essay, ¹⁶ portrays nuances of the globalization process vis-à-vis LE. The author holds the opinion that with the changing global scenario, international outsourcing of LE is a must for developing countries. ¹⁷ The eleventh article ¹⁸ probes implications of the IoL on LE and its implementation on human rights law in Australia. The author describes how the Australian government was obliged to defend a domestic law in a dispute resolution proceedings under international instruments, ¹⁹ and thereby makes a case for the Australian LE to contemplate the skills and knowledge today’s lawyers need in an internationalized legal profession.

Part IV of the book inquires upon the need for international legal practice (ILP). The first essay under this part ²⁰ highlights considerable changes, which have occurred in the practice of commercial law. The author explains how ILP has raised demands from its practitioners; with much wider and far-reaching scope and involvement of international law, specialization has gained much importance. The next essay ²¹ criticizes the existing practices of comprehensive knowledge of law. The author affirms how ILP constantly requires quick, sharp, strong thinking and speaking skills. ²² The author opined that unless these skills are not focused upon by law schools, the gap between school and life will remain as wide as ever. ²³

The final part (Part V) contains two essays, ²⁴ focusing on the essence of international litigation and arbitration. It is followed by a conclusion by the editors wherein along with different suggestions, views and approaches, some substantive and creative ideas and information on IoL and LE are advocated.

There is not an iota of doubt that this book contains a rich collection on comparative LE, covering varied range of topics. The essays are critical, provocative and thoughtful and, therefore, a must read for those who are exposed to IoL, be they academics, judges, students, arbitrators, practitioners and those who are somehow interested or engaged in legal reform and policy. Understandably, the evolving initiatives and philosophies got more attention in the book. This fascinating collection of essays demonstrates the challenges of IoL through their extensive knowledge and experience in civil law, common law and mixed jurisdictions around the globe. Certainly, their analysis of the implications for various stakeholders appears original and their different proposals for dealing with the challenges present both practical as well as radical solution. However, there is a general neglect on concerns emanating within South Asia, notably SAARC nations. Though the book covers diverse fields of LE, there are many other concerns pertaining to LE which requires guarded attention; but nevertheless the editors might have hoped that their sincere effort might inspire legal scholars to explore other areas of LE, particularly with respect to the South Asia.