Idealization of Law and the Limits of Legal Regulation: The Dialectics of the Relationship between Law and Statute

The article examines the methodological implications of the idealization of law in contemporary legal doctrine and analyses the limits of legal regulation as an expression of the internal contradictions of legal reality. It argues that the evaluative opposition between law and statute, reflected in formulas such as “non-legal statute” and similar labels, reduces the explanatory capacity of theory and weakens the link between scholarly analysis and legal practice. The paper demonstrates that the boundaries of legal influence are determined not only by value premises but also by institutional mechanisms of implementation, the growth of normative complexity, and the need to reconcile private-law instruments with the public interest in the fields of arbitration, infrastructure projects, and inter-state convergence of regulation. The study concludes that a neutral, de-ideologized approach to law and statute as interconnected elements of the legal order is preferable, provided that the social effects of regulation and the requirements of legal certainty are duly taken into account, as a matter of restraint and responsibility.