Legal Pluralism and Problems of Legal Application

In order to qualify a situation as a case of normative pluralism, it is essential that within the same social environment, rules of different origins are operative, i.e., they are valid and applied, so that the person in question can choose the norms that guide their own behaviour. This is the phenomenon which Boaventura de Sousa Santos defined as 'interlegality.' The author does not propose a pluralist conception of applying law in a multicultural society, but defending a form of jurisdictional monism that is motivated by practical-normative reasons in accordance with the principle of non-discrimination. The claim, in other words, is that we must treat those who are different from ourselves with 'equal concern and respect.' People belonging to different cultures from our own culture may de facto decide within their own group to let their own legal conflicts be dealt with by community 'jurisdictions.' At the same time, however, the democratic-constitutional legal system must guarantee the administration of justice in the 'last resort,' in accordance with the principle set out in the ‘equal protection clause’ (XIV am., sect. 1, US Const.) prescribing that the State cannot 'deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.' It is clear that very often the person asking for such protection will be the most vulnerable person within traditional communities: women.