Contending Orders

examines how the rule of law is understood conceptually and pragmatically-both on its own terms and as part of post-conflict state-building efforts. It examines thinner, more process-orientated understandings of the rule of law as well as thicker, more substantive conceptualizations with additional political, social, and economic components. While both approaches are worthwhile, I argue that a minimalist conception of rule of law offers the most appropriate standard for assessing progress in judicial state-building after conflict--