IS THERE A NECESSITY TO CONSTITUTE THE CONCEPT
The objective undertaken by the author of this paper is to define the term “law-making” in the legal discourse. Following the analysis, the author indicates three possible manners of the narration related to this concept. The first one is the traditional narration, which associates “law-making” with the activities of state organs responsible for constituting law. The second one is the “communicative narration” presented with the concepts recognising law in terms of the communicative phenomena and the third narration linked with postmodern jurisprudence. There is a question posed about the need to reinterpret the traditional characteristics of “law-making,” which breeds doubt about the identification of law. It occurs due to the fact that many of the standards, which are really the premise of decisions taken by the authorities applying the law (e.g. Many legal principles), are not justified in the contents traditionally linked with the concept of regulation. The author recommends a new re-reading of the terms “regulation” and “law-making” through the link with each human activity, which consequently constitutes the base for the legal norms. The study was recapitulated by the conclusions.