Zoekresultaat: 6 artikelen

x
Artikel

Access_open The substance of citizenship: is it rights all the way down?

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 1 2018
Trefwoorden Citizenship, Political Membership, Citizenship Rights
Auteurs Chiara Raucea
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This paper examines how the distribution of social goods within a political community relates to decisions on membership boundaries. The author challenges two renowned accounts of such a relation: firstly, Walzer’s account according to which decisions on membership boundaries necessarily precede decisions on distribution; secondly, Benhabib’s account, according to which membership boundaries can be called into question on the basis of universalist claims. Departing from both accounts, the author concludes that actual changes in the pool of participants in practices of creation and exchange of social goods pressure a political community to redefine its distributive patterns and, accordingly, the boundaries of its formal political membership. This claim will be supported by the analysis of threshold cases decided by the EU Court of Justice, in which EU citizenship is invoked with the atypical purpose of granting rights to a specific group of non-formal members.


Chiara Raucea
Chiara Raucea is lecturer at Tilburg Law School. A longer version of her article is included in her doctoral dissertation Citizenship Inverted: From Rights To Status?, defended in December 2017 at Tilburg University.
Artikel

Access_open The Justification of Basic Rights

A Response to Forst

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 3 2016
Trefwoorden Basic rights, Justification, Kant
Auteurs Glen Newey
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This paper responds to Rainer Forst’s article ‘The Justification of Basic Rights’. I argue that Forst's main thesis is difficult to pin down, partly because it is formulated in significantly distinct ways at numerous points. I offer a possible formulation of the argument but note that this encapsulates a fallacy; I further argue that his inference of the basic rights seems to imply an over-moralisation of social life and that his argument does not distinguish rights with discretionary and non-discretionary content. Then I query Forst’s claim that a right to justification is a condition of engaging in justificatory discourse. This leads to the conclusion that what goes into the process of justification, including who figures in the discursive community, are irreducibly political questions, whose answers cannot be convincingly specified antecedently by a form of moral legislation. I argue that actual discursive processes allow for considerably more contingency and contextual variability than Forst’s construction acknowledges. This extends, as I suggest in conclusion, to the idea that content can be specified via the Kantian notion that acceptability requires the ‘containment’ of an actor's ends by another, such as an affected party.


Glen Newey
Glen Newey is professor of Political Philosophy and Ethics at Leiden University.
Artikel

Access_open Juridical Acts and the Gap between Is and Ought

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 1 2013
Trefwoorden naturalistic fallacy, duty, obligation, is/ought, contract, promise
Auteurs Jaap Hage
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article addresses the possibility of deriving ought from is. To that purpose it casts doubt on the very distinction between is and ought; distinguishes between duties, obligations, being obligated and owing to do something; revitalises Searle’s famous derivation of ought from is by replacing promises with contracts; and discusses some of the traditional objections against this derivation. The conclusions are that it is not problematic at all to ‘derive’ the existence of obligations from solely is-premises, and that it is not very problematic to ‘derive’ an ought from the existence of an obligation. The quotes around ‘derive’ signal that the nature of derivation also plays a role in this discussion.


Jaap Hage
Jaap Hage holds the chair for Jurisprudence at Maastricht University.
Discussie

Our Common Future in the Global Village

Towards an international European Journal of Law & Society

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 01 2008
Auteurs Niels van Manen
Auteursinformatie

Niels van Manen
Niels van Manen is universitair hoofddocent Algemene rechtsleer (rechtssociologie en rechtsfilosofie) aan de Universiteit van Amsterdam. Hij geeft onderwijs in de vakken Algemene rechtsleer en Strafrecht in Perspectief. Zijn onderzoek richt zich op rechterlijke rechtsvinding, de multiculturele samenleving en het recht, en de methode van (rechts)wetenschappelijk onderzoek. Zijn belangrijkste nevenfuncties zijn voorzitter van de Commissie voor de Politieklachten Amsterdam-Amstelland en raadsheer-plaatsvervanger in het gerechtshof Amsterdam.
Artikel

Access_open Wetenschappelijke rechtsgeleerdheid

Commentaar op het preadvies van Carel Smith

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 3 2009
Trefwoorden law and hermeneutics, law and normativity, one right answer thesis, legal jurisprudence, legal doctrine
Auteurs Prof. dr. Arend Soeteman
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article is a comment on Carel Smith’s paper. Smith rightly argues that the study of law has a hermeneutic character. But his interpretation of legal hermeneutics includes the thesis that in hard cases there is no right or true legal decision. This seems to have negative implications for the scholarly character of the study of law: in hard cases any solution goes. This paper argues, against Smith, that the study of law defends right answers for hard cases. It is also normative in another sense: legal answers, in easy cases as well as in hard cases, always presuppose a normative interpretation of the legal sources. This contributes to the differences of opinion under lawyers. But it is no obstacle to the scholarly character of the study of law, as long as a rational debate about these legal answers and the underlying values and principles is possible. Smith’s rejection of the right answer thesis, however, prevents the possibility of such a rational debate.


Prof. dr. Arend Soeteman
Arend Soeteman is professor at the Faculty of Law, VU University Amsterdam.
Artikel

Access_open De kunst van het vak

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 2 2007
Trefwoorden pleidooi, beschikking, bewijsmiddel, bouw, citaat, confrontatie, idee, kind, levering, ontslagname
Auteurs P. Westerman

P. Westerman
Interface Showing Amount
U kunt door de volledige tekst zoeken naar alle artikelen door uw zoekterm in het zoekveld in te vullen. Als u op de knop 'Zoek' heeft geklikt komt u op de zoekresultatenpagina met filters, die u helpen om snel bij het door u gezochte artikel te komen. Er zijn op dit moment twee filters: rubriek en jaar.