in 1804. But when French domination ended, the ov/c mv/continued to he the law of Belgium. Howcan that he, since before the impt)- sition of the code civil Belgium was a land t)f numerous local customs.^' Again, a detail savs it all for the effect of legal transplants. A distinguished Belgian jurist, E. R. N. Arntz published at Brussels in itSys" —long N’ears after the fall of Napoleon —his Coiirs dc Droit Civil h'rau(;ais. 4'his hook was meant for a Belgian readership, hut had references to some new I'rench law. 4'hen in i8~9, .\rntz published a second edition,'" w ith references to all Belgian and I Vench law, hecause, he saws (p. iii), of the success in I'rance of the first edition. 1 low can this he if legal transplants are impossible.- IV. L’ntil recentK’, "Furkev was usualK regarded as the most e.\- treme example of' a modern legal transplant. I will let INin Oriicii, Turkish, and law professor at both the Unixersities of (ilasgow and Rotterdam, open the scene: What is regarded rodax as the theorx' et 'competing legal sx’stem.s,' alheit used mainlx' in the rhetoric of 'law and ecom)mics' analx sis, was the basis of' the reception of laws that formed the rurkish legal swstem in the tears - The x arioiis erodes were chosen fromwhat were seen to he 'the best' in their field for \ arious rea.sons. No single legal system.ser\ ed as the model. The choice was driven in some cases bv the percei\ ed prestige of the model, in .some bv efficiency and in others hv chance. tihiMising a number of different models max hax e gixen the borrowings 'cultural legitimacy' as the desire to modernise and westernise was not beholden to any one dominant culture. It would ha\e been possible to choose Switzerland or (iermanx and borrow solely fromone of these lurisdictions. It was instead the cix il law, the law of obligations and cix il procedure from Switzerland, commercial law, maritime law and criminal procedure from (lermanx’, criminal law from Italx’ and administratixe law from I'rance that were chosen, translated, adapted and adjusted to solxe the social and legal problems of Turkex and to fit together, (ihoice means taking one option as opposed to another, and the e.xistence of choice is what differentiates a reception from an imposition. I'hus, the difference between reception and imposition is related to the e.\i17 See, above all, Georges de Ghew/iet, Institutions du Droit Belgique (Lille, 1736). 18 (Brussels, Paris, 1879) 110
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=