The Interaction Between International Law and Local Cultural Practices
Keywords:
international law, local cultural practices, legal pluralism, human rights, cultural rights, qualitative research, Tehran, legal consciousness, vernacularizationAbstract
This study aimed to explore how legal professionals, civil society actors, and community-based cultural intermediaries in Tehran understand, interpret, and negotiate the interaction between international legal norms and local cultural practices. This qualitative study was conducted using a conventional thematic analysis approach. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with 24 participants in Tehran, including lawyers, legal consultants, academics, civil society workers, cultural mediators, and community representatives with experience in rights-related disputes involving cultural norms, family practices, minority identities, informal mediation, and access to justice. Participants were selected through purposive sampling followed by snowball recruitment. Interviews lasted between 45 and 80 minutes and continued until theoretical saturation was achieved. All interviews were audio-recorded with consent, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using NVivo software. Coding proceeded through open coding, axial categorization, and theme development. Trustworthiness was enhanced through member checking, peer debriefing, reflexive memo-writing, and maintenance of an audit trail. The analysis generated five main categories: translation of international norms into culturally meaningful language; coexistence and tension between formal law and informal cultural authority; cultural practices as both protective resources and sources of rights restriction; trust, procedural justice, and accessibility in rights implementation; and the role of intermediaries in bridging international law and local communities. Participants emphasized that international law was rarely rejected in principle, but its legitimacy depended on how it was communicated, localized, and institutionally implemented. They described cultural practices as dynamic rather than fixed, noting that local actors frequently reinterpret tradition in response to legal, social, and generational change. The findings suggest that the interaction between international law and local cultural practices should not be understood as a simple conflict between universalism and relativism. Instead, it is a negotiated process in which legal norms gain meaning through translation, trust-building, and culturally informed institutional practice. Rights-based implementation is more effective when it respects cultural identity while maintaining clear limits against discrimination, coercion, and harm.
Downloads
References
Baxi, U. (2006). The future of human rights (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.
Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Sage.
Cowan, J. K., Dembour, M.-B., & Wilson, R. A. (Eds.). (2001). Culture and rights: Anthropological perspectives. Cambridge University Press.
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). Sage.
Donnelly, J. (2013). Universal human rights in theory and practice (3rd ed.). Cornell University Press.
Geertz, C. (1983). Local knowledge: Further essays in interpretive anthropology. Basic Books.
Goodale, M. (2009). Surrendering to utopia: An anthropology of human rights. Stanford University Press.
Griffiths, J. (1986). What is legal pluralism? The Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law, 18(24), 1–55.
Levitt, P., & Merry, S. (2009). Vernacularization on the ground: Local uses of global women’s rights in Peru, China, India and the United States. Global Networks, 9(4), 441–461.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage.
Merry, S. E. (1988). Legal pluralism. Law & Society Review, 22(5), 869–896.
Merry, S. E. (2006). Human rights and gender violence: Translating international law into local justice. University of Chicago Press.
Moore, S. F. (1973). Law and social change: The semi-autonomous social field as an appropriate subject of study. Law & Society Review, 7(4), 719–746.
Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 1–13.
Santos, B. de S. (2002). Toward a new legal common sense: Law, globalization, and emancipation (2nd ed.). Butterworths LexisNexis.
Tamanaha, B. Z. (2008). Understanding legal pluralism: Past to present, local to global. Sydney Law Review, 30(3), 375–411.
Twining, W. (2009). General jurisprudence: Understanding law from a global perspective. Cambridge University Press.
UNESCO. (2001). UNESCO Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.
United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women. (2015). General recommendation No. 33 on women’s access to justice.
United Nations General Assembly. (1948). Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
United Nations General Assembly. (1966a). International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
United Nations General Assembly. (1966b). International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
United Nations General Assembly. (2007). United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
Downloads
Published
Submitted
Revised
Accepted
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
