SYMPOSIUM ON THE FUTURE OF GLOBAL LAW

| 10 | Ch. Pamboukis exponential technological advances. Often described as post-modern—by opposition to modern—our era is characterized primarily by the revolution of communications (and, therefore, the expansion and interconnection of societies around the globe). Important consequences derive from this: change of the perception of time and lo- cation, amalgamation of societies, globalization of knowledge, relativity of borders, formation of new multiple societies transcending 14 if not exceeding people limited in a Nation-State, internationalization of financial and economical activities and markets, important changes in societal organization (web organizations and civ- il societies unions) and family (no sexes unions). Importantly, we note the fall (at least partially) of the Westphalian model and the associated notion of state sover- eignty 15 . A non-exclusive State regulatory future designs the present and the future. It is important to emphasize the growing speed of technological advances. The changes, concerning especially time, by globalization are qualitative and create more rapidly the necessity of regulation. The world is in dire need of faster and glo- balized regulation. The incapacity to respond to that need creates a vacuum, which moves the line between law-regulation and no law-regulation in favor of the second. 4. The rise of the individual as international actor allows the affirmation that, even with a degree of exaggeration, every human is potentially a legal order in the sense that (he or she) could be a source of regulation. It is, thus, no surprise that in the field of Private International Law we observe the dominion of the principle of au- tonomy of will in international regulation. As a consequence, we observe the rise of private legal regimes 16 . The individualism has, if not defeated, importantly lim- ited the force of State sovereignty. States are not the exclusive protagonist in reg- ulation and their sovereignty is limited by other non-State actors. We do have le- gal orders beyond the State. And, as a matter of fact, we do experience non-State Global Law , CUP, p. 10-11 speaks above cacophony of global talk. He points out that global law provides an excellent snapshot of the sheer variety of contemporary uses of global law synonymous to a variety of terms as world law, universal law, common law, jus gentium or earth jurisprudence (see in particular notes 25,26,27,28, p. 11). Special mention should be made to P. Jessup a pioneer with he’s book on Transnational Law (1956) in which proposes to examine the law applicable to the complex interrelated world community which may be described as beginning with the individual and reaching on up to the so-called “family of na- tions” or “society of states. 14. Walker speaks above double normativity, op.cit ., p. 23. 15. Pamboukis, Droit international privé holistique: Droit uniforme et droit international privé , RCADI t. 330 (2007), p. 56 ff. 16. Muller/Zouridis/Frishman/Kistermaker, Introduction, The Law of the Future and the Future of Law , Vol. II, p. 4, affirm that the essence of volume I is bipolar internationalization of law and the rise of private legal regimes.