All
 
|
 
 


Values discourse in modern Constitutional Law
 
PIIS102694520020489-8-1
DOI10.31857/S102694520020489-8
Publication type Article
Status Published
Authors
Natalia V. Varlamova 
Occupation: Leading Research Fellow, Department of the Human Rights, Institute of State and Law of the Russian Academy of Sciences
Affiliation: Institute of State and Law of the Russian Academy of Sciences
Address: Russian Federation, Moscow
Journal nameGosudarstvo i pravo
EditionIssue 6
Pages57-67
Abstract

In modern Constitutional Law, there is a clear tendency to justify almost all legal concepts in terms of values. The foundations of the constitutional order, constitutional principles, human dignity and rights, democracy, and, finally, constitutionalism itself as a whole are recognized as values. This demonstrates the rejection of a purely formal, positivist understanding of the constitution, constitutionality and constitutionalism. At the same time, values, by virtue of their nature, are not the most effective tools for the meaningful interpretation of traditional legal concepts and constructions. Values a priori are not universal, but relative and subjective, they are not proportionate to each other, adherence to them is often irrational and very meaningful to the individual. Because of this, values can provoke conflict, their regulatory potential is not great, and appealing to them generates many problems in the practice of constitutional review, which is the subject of this article.

KeywordsConstitutional Law, constitutional values, constitutional principles, constitutional review, proportionality
Received15.03.2022
Publication date20.06.2022
Number of characters35269
Cite  
100 rub.
When subscribing to an article or issue, the user can download PDF, evaluate the publication or contact the author. Need to register.

Number of purchasers: 0, views: 446

Readers community rating: votes 0 

1. Alexi R. Weight formula / transl. from English by V.V. Arkhipov // Russ. yearbook of the theory of law. 2010. No. 3 / ed. by A.V. Polyakov. SPb., 2011. P. 208 - 228 (in Russ.).
2. Bazhanov A.A. Substantiation of the principle of proportionality in the practice of the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany (1950 - 1960) // Herald of Kutafin University (MGUA). Comparative and Integration Law. 2018. No. 5 (45). P. 159 - 168. DOI: 10.17803/2311-5998.2018.45.5.159-168 (in Russ.).
3. Bazhanov A.A. The assertion of the principle of proportionality in the Administrative Law of Germany (XIX – early XX century.) // History of the state and law. 2018. No. 6. P. 71 - 76. DOI: 10.18572/1812-3805-2018-6-71-76 (in Russ.).
4. Belov S.A. Rationality of judicial balancing of constitutional values by means of a proportionality test // St. Petersburg Lawyer. 2016. No. 1. P. 64, 65 (in Russ.).
5. Belov S.A. Is rational discourse capable of justifying value choice in law? // Jurisprudence. 2014. No. 5 (316). P. 232, 236 (in Russ.).
6. Gadzhiev G.A., Voynikanis E.A. Balancing values and the value of balancing // Questions of philosophy. 2021. No. 9. P. 13 - 24. DOI: 10.21146/0042-8744-2021-9-13-24; No. 10. P. 53 - 64. DOI: 10.21146/0042-8744-2021-10-53-64 (in Russ.).
7. Zorkin V.D. Axiological aspects of the Constitution of Russia // Comparative constitutional review. 2008. No. 4 (65). P. 7, 8, 18 (in Russ.).
8. Zorkin V.D. Value approach in constitutional regulation of rights and freedoms // Journal of Russ. law. 2008. No. 12. P. 3, 14 (in Russ.).
9. Klochko V.I. Approaches to the definition of the concept of “constitutional values” in the theory of Constitutional Law of Russia and foreign countries // Herald of the RUDN. Ser.: Legal Sciences. 2015. No. 2. P. 121 (in Russ.).
10. Meller K. The principle of proportionality: in response to criticism // Comparative Constitutional Review. 2014. No. 4 (101). P. 92, 93, 95, 96, 103 (in Russ.).
11. Timoshina E.V., Kraevsky A.A., Salmin D.N. Methodology of judicial interpretation: weighing tools in the situation of human rights competition // Herald of the SPbU. Law. 2015. Issue 3. P. 4 - 34 (in Russ.).
12. Finnis J. Natural law and natural rights / transl. from English by V.P. Gaydamak, A.V. Panikhina. M., 2012. P. 19, 35 (in Russ.).
13. Tsakirakis S. Proportionality: encroachment on human rights? // Comparative Constitutional Review. 2011. No. 2 (81). P. 56, 62 (in Russ.).
14. Shaio A. Constitutional values in theory and judicial practice: introduction // Comparative Constitutional Review. 2008. No. 4 (65). P. 5 (in Russ.).
15. Barak A. Proportionality. Constitutional Rights and their Limitations / transl. from the Hebrew by D. Kalir. Cambridge; NY., 2012. P. 178–210, 245 - 370. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9781139035293
16. Beatty D. The Ultimate Rule of Law. Oxford; NY., 2004. P. 162. DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199269808.001.0001
17. Bernal-Pulido C. The Migration of Proportionality across Europe // New Zealand Journal of Public and International Law. 2013. Vol. 11. No. 3. P. 483–515.
18. Bobbio N. El problema del positivismo jurídico. Buenos Aires, 1965; Cano R.M.J. Positivismo ideológico e ideología positivista en Norberto Bobbio: precursor del positivismo ético // Huri-Age. 2009. No. 7. URL: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/43327657_Positivismo_ideologico_e_ideologia_positivista_en_Norberto_Bobbio_precursor_del_positivismo_etico  (accessed: 10.03.2022).
19. Cohen E., Ben-Ari E. Hard Choices: A Sociological Perspective on Value Incommensurability // Human Studies. 1993. Vol. 16. Iss. 3. P. 267–297. DOI: 10.1007/BF01323136
20. Dworkin R.A. Matter of Principle. Cambridge, 1985. P. 191.
21. Gallie W.B. Essentially Contested Concepts // Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society. 1956. Vol. 56. Iss. 1. P. 167–198.
22. Habermas J. Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy / transl. by W. Rehg. Cambridge, 1996. P. 253–259, 263, 545. DOI: 10.7551/mitpress/1564.001.0001
23. Jackson V.C. Being Proportional about Proportionality. Book review: The Ultimate Rule of Law. By David M. Beatty. NY., 2004. P. 193 + xvii // Constitutional Commentary. 2004. Vol. 21. Iss. 3. P. 803–859.
24. Jackson V.C. Constitution Law in an Age of Proportionality // The Yale Law Journal. 2015. Vol. 124. No. 8. P. 3094–3196.
25. Keesen J., Ulrich J. Constitutions – Their Role Through the Ages: Notes on the 59th Meeting of German-Speaking Public Law Assistants in Frankfurt am Main // German Law Journal. 2019. Vol. 20. Iss. 5. P. 749. DOI: 10.1017/glj.2019.59
26. Lacey N. The Metaphor of Proportionality // Journal of Law and Society. 2016. Vol. 43. Iss. 1. P. 27–44. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-6478.2016.00739x
27. Lautsch E.R. Speech at the 2019 Assistententagung: The Open Society of Constitutional Patriots? –  How the Grundgesetz as Patriotic Instrument Ousts Political Discourse [Die offene Gesellschaft der Verfassungspatrioten? – Wie das Grundgesetz als patriotische Folie den politischen Diskurs verdrängt] (Feb. 20, 2019).
28. Nishihara H. The Significance of Constitutional Values // Potchefstroomse Elektroniese Regsblad / Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal. 2001.Vol. 4. No. 1. P. 2, 3, 13, 14. DOI: 10.17159/1727-3781/2001/v4i1a2877
29. Parsons T. The Structure of Social Action: A Study in Social Theory with Special Reference to a Group of Recent European Writers. NY., 1937. P. 643.
30. Perry M.J. Morality, Politics, and Law: A Bicentennial Essay. NY., 1988. P. 135, 152.
31. Přibáň J. Constitutional Values as the Normalisation of Societal Power: From a Moral Transvaluation to a Systemic SelfValuation // Hague Journal on the Rule of Law. 2019. Vol. 11. Iss. 2–3. P. 452 - 455, 457. DOI: 10.1007/s40803-019-00111-4
32. Rawls J. Political Liberalism. NY., 1993. P. 193, 194.
33. Schmitt C. Die Tyrannei der Werte // Schmitt C. Die Tyrannei der Werte. 3 Aufl. Berlin, 2011. S. 9 - 55.
34. Schorkopf F. Value Constitutionalism in the European Union // German Law Journal. 2020. Vol. 21. P. 956–967. DOI: 10.1017/glj.2020.51
35. South Africa's Constitution of 1996 with Amendments through 2012 // CONSTITUTE. URL: https://www.constituteproject.org/countries/Africa/South_Africa?lang=en  (accessed: 16.02.2022).
36. Urbina F.J. A Critique of Proportionality // The American Journal of Jurisprudence. 2012. Vol. 57. Iss. 1. P. 49–80. DOI: 10.1093/ajj/57.1.49
37. Venter F. A Hierarchy of Constitutional Values // Konrad Adenauer Stiftung Constitution and Law: Seminar Report III. Johannesburg, 1997. P. 17.

Система Orphus

Loading...
Up