نظریه مجموعی، دریچه‌ای برای تحلیل پویایی‌های نهادی از منظر حقوق عمومی

در حالیکه اصل «قطعیت» و «امنیت حقوقی» از اصول قانونگذاری مدرن شناخته می‌شود، در دوران گذار به عصر دیجیتال و پسامدرنیسم، اصل عدم قطعیت، نوآوری و انعطاف‌پذیری بنا به اقتضای تحولات سریع اجتماعی اقتصادی مبتنی بر پیشرفت فناوری، در برخی اسناد حقوقی بین‌المللی اخذ می‌شود. گزافه نیست اگر بگوییم که نظام‌های حقوقی در عصر پست مدرن در حال باز تعریف حاکمیت قانون در بستر پویایی‌های نهادی و تحولات فناوری‌پایه هستند. در این میان مکتب فلسفی دلوزی با طرح نظریه مجموعی با رویکردی خلاق و انتقادی به کارکرد قانون در عصر جدید پرداخته و تحلیلی پویا از فلسفه حقوق ارائه می‌دهد. این نوشتار با مداقه بر معرفت‌شناسی و جامعه‌شناسی این نظریه در نگاه سه تن از صاحبنظران این مکتب مجموعی یعنی ژیل دلوز، گتاری و مانوئل دلندا به امکان‌سنجی درک پویایی‌های نهادی در فرایند حاکمیت قانون می‌پردازد.

assemblage theory: a lens for analyzing institutional dynamics from the perspective of public law

introduction while the principles of certainty and legal security are foundational to modern legislation, the transition to the digital age and postmodernism has necessitated the adoption of principles such as uncertainty, innovation, and flexibility in some international legal documents due to the rapid socio-economic developments driven by technological progress. the assemblage theory, informed by the philosophies of deleuze, guattari, and delanda, offers a dynamic understanding of the actions and network interactions among social actors. this framework facilitates a deeper understanding of institutional dynamics and highlights the necessity of adapting legal dynamics to specific contexts. literature reviewrhizome thinking, a concept developed by gilles deleuze, offers a critical perspective on the tradition of western philosophy. deleuze critiques the tree-like, vertical, and prescriptive structure of thought that is rooted in the concept of being, advocating instead for a horizontal, networked, and becoming structure as the foundation for thinking and knowledge. he employs the metaphor of the rhizome to illustrate this alternative mode of thought. manuel delanda offers an alternative perspective that builds upon and modifies deleuze and guattari’s assemblage theory. from delanda’s viewpoint, entities are collections that increase in scale and complexity as components are added. he asserts that sets are the wholes whose characteristics emerge from the interactions between their parts. given the existing literature, the assemblage theory has been applied in a limited way to explore the requirements of modern society and the social changes that encompass the civilization process in the contemporary societies of the 20th-century. assemblage thinking has emerged at the forefront of a paradigm shift, viewing space and agency as the product of connections between humans and non-humans that create unstable wholes. this shift provides new avenues for rethinking the relationships between power, politics, and space from a more processual and socio-material perspective. in recent years, an increasing number of researchers have begun to view the state as a collection of heterogeneous elements, reconstructing the socio-material foundations of its functioning. geographers, in particular, tend to focus on examining the spatial dimensions of state power. it appears that jurists are among the last groups of scholars to engage with the phenomenon of post-modernism while continuing to adhere to the principles of modern law. materials and methodsthe present study relied on a descriptive–analytical method to examine the feasibility of understanding institutional dynamics in the rule of law process, focusing on the epistemology and sociology of the assemblage theory as articulated by three key figures of this school of thought: gilles deleuze, félix guattari, and manuel delanda. results and discussionaccording to assemblage theory, policymaking is conceptualized within a social-material framework known as assemblage. in this approach, process and non-linearity serve as the main forms of policy development. various actors—including local residents, interest groups, local institutions and authorities, the media, national governments, and sometimes international agencies—contribute to the formulation of policies and laws. the development of policy processes does not follow a linear path; it is not simply a matter of information flowing down the hierarchy from policymakers to citizens. moreover, it does not consist of a linear sequence of activities over time, such as moving from the formulation of agenda to the approval and implementation of the law. in this sense, politics is not viewed merely as policymaking or as doing politics; rather, it is understood as the occurrence of politics within a multi-level, heterogeneous complex network. the network comprises a set of different non-linear processes, including different agencies and motives.