Paper long abstract:

Globalization is changing law: market with its in-formal rules seems to replace the old positive law. The sociology of law has indicated legal transformations in terms of lex mercatoria, the Unidroit Principles, codes of conduct, etc. (Ferrarese 2006; Galgano 2005; De Sousa Santos, Rodríguez-Garavito 2005; Teubner 2005). The Kelsenian pyramid - the strong metaphor of the positive law - has been replaced by the net (Ost, Van de Kerchove 2002; Pastore 2003) where a new law, coming spontaneously from below as a product of the economic and social agents activity (transaction, agreements, financial operations), is showing the weakness of the national and international law. In this context where the legislative power seems to be unable to protect human rights and to warranty social justice (De Sousa Santos, Rodríguez-Garavito 2005) different forms of regulatory techniques (Fudge, McCrystal, Sankaran 2012) and some jurisprudential decisions (national and international judges' decisions) are supplying the positive regulation, attempting to protect human rights. Aim of this paper is to show how in times of globalization regulative law with its instruments is changing and how alternative regulatory techniques, such as national and international jurisprudence, are trying to protect human rights. I also will explore these issues examining some legal cases, such as the Nike's scandal in Pakistan.