Contemporary Issues in Law, Culture, and Globalization 3092-7250 1 Serial Number 6 2025 11 01 Global Norm Diffusion and Local Legal Resistance: Cultural Contestation in Practice Global Norm Diffusion and Local Legal Resistance: Cultural Contestation in Practice 53 63 EN Journal Article 2025 06 08 <p>This study aimed to explore how globally circulating legal norms are interpreted, translated, resisted, and selectively incorporated within local legal and socio-cultural practices in Tehran. This qualitative study used semi-structured interviews to examine the everyday meanings attached to global legal norms among legal professionals, civil society actors, academics, and community-based practitioners in Tehran. Participants were selected through purposive sampling, followed by snowball recruitment to identify individuals with practical experience in law, rights discourse, institutional policy, or community mediation. A total of 28 participants were interviewed, and theoretical saturation was reached after the twenty-fourth interview, with four additional interviews conducted to confirm the stability of the emerging categories. Interviews were audio-recorded with consent, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed through thematic analysis. NVivo software was used to organize transcripts, code segments, compare categories, and construct thematic relationships. Four main categories were identified: global norms as aspirational legal language, cultural translation and vernacularization, institutional gatekeeping and selective compliance, and everyday resistance through pragmatic negotiation. Participants described global norms as symbolically powerful but socially contested when they appeared detached from local moral vocabularies, institutional capacity, or culturally recognized forms of legitimacy. Resistance did not appear only as rejection; rather, it often operated through reinterpretation, delay, selective enforcement, and translation into locally acceptable language. Participants emphasized that the practical acceptance of global legal norms depended on trust, institutional credibility, cultural resonance, and the ability of local actors to connect abstract legal principles to concrete social problems. The study suggests that global norm diffusion is not a linear process of legal transfer but a contested socio-legal practice shaped by cultural meaning, institutional mediation, and everyday negotiation. Local resistance should not be understood merely as opposition to global law; it may also function as a mechanism through which communities test, reinterpret, and domesticate global legal ideas.</p> https://journalcilcg.com/index.php/cilcg/article/download/46/38