Zoekresultaat: 19 artikelen

x
De zoekresultaten worden gefilterd op:
Rubriek Discussie x
Discussie

Still a rule of law guy

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 1 2013
Trefwoorden rule of law, sociology of law, suppression of arbitrary power, normative theory
Auteurs Martin Krygier
Auteursinformatie

Martin Krygier
Martin Krygier is Gordon Samuels Professor of Law and Social Theory at the University of New South Wales, co-director of its Network for Interdisciplinary Studies of Law, Adjunct Professor at the Regulatory Institutions Network, Australian National University, and a Fellow of the Australian Academy of Social Sciences. His most recent book is Philip Selznick. Ideals in the World, Stanford University Press, 2012. He has written extensively on the rule of law: its nature, conditions, and challenges. Apart from some 40 essays on these themes, he has edited and contributed to Spreading Democracy and the Rule of Law? (Springer Verlag, 2006); Rethinking the Rule of Law after Communism (CEU Press, 2005); Community and Legality: the Intellectual Legacy of Philip Selznick (Rowman & Littlefield, 2002), The Rule of Law after Communism (Ashgate, 1999), Marxism and Communism. Posthumous Reflections on Politics, Society, and Law (Rodopi, 1994). He is on the editorial boards of the Hague Journal on the Rule of Law, Annual Review of Law and Social Science, Ratio Juris, East Central Europe, and is a contributing jurisprudence editor to Jotwell (Journal of things we like lots).
Discussie

Access_open Who is ‘we’?

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 3 2012
Trefwoorden democracy, we, world, self-government, democratic impulse
Auteurs Evert van der Zweerde
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Which human material forms the real basis of a democratic polity, i.e. of the preconditions of a ‘we’ that inhabits a ‘world’? How is a political ‘we’ related to the ‘we’ that is created by systemic processes of subjectivization? These questions presents themselves with new relevance in a ‘globalized’ world, in which democratic spurts and waves spread from other parts of the world to the West, and in which the liberal-democratic rule of law state appears to be undermining its own moral preconditions. The real task ahead is to find out what ‘we’ denotes politically.


Evert van der Zweerde
Evert van der Zweerde is Professor of Political Philosophy at Radboud University, Nijmegen.
Discussie

Access_open ‘We Are Also Here.’ Whose Revolution Will Democracy Be?

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 3 2012
Trefwoorden democracy, public sphere, civil society, Arab Spring, feminism
Auteurs Judith Vega
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Steven Winter’s argument is premised on a sharp contrast of individualist and social revolutions. I elaborate my doubts about his argument on three accounts, involving feminist perspectives at various points. First, I take issue with Winter’s portrayal of liberal theory, redirecting the focus of his concern to economic libertarianism rather than liberalism, and arguing a more hospitable attitude to the Kantian pith in the theory of democracy. Secondly, I discuss his conceptualization of democracy, adding the conceptual distinction of civil society and public sphere. Thirdly, I question his normative notion of socially situated selves as having an intrinsic relation to social freedom. I moreover consult cultural history on the gendered symbolics of market and democracy to further problematize Winter’s take on either’s meaning for social freedom.


Judith Vega
Judith Vega is Lecturer in Social and Political Philosophy at the University of Groningen, the Netherlands.
Discussie

Access_open ‘Nothing Spells Freedom Like a Hooters Meal’

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 3 2012
Trefwoorden Enlightenment universalism, self-governance, freedom, moral point of view, political participation
Auteurs Ronald Tinnevelt
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Winter’s criticism of the conventional account of freedom and democracy is best understood against the background of the history of Enlightenment critique. Winter claims that our current misunderstanding of freedom and self-governance is the result of the strict dichotomy between subject and object. This paper critically reconstructs Winter’s notion of freedom and self-governance which does not adequately address (a) the details of his anti-collectivist claim, and (b) the necessary conditions for the possibility of a moral point of view. This makes it difficult to determine how Winter can distinguish between freedom and lack of freedom, and to assess the limited or radical nature of his critique of Enlightenment universalism.


Ronald Tinnevelt
Ronald Tinnevelt is Associate Professor Philosophy of Law at Radboud University, Nijmegen.
Discussie

Facing Up to the ICC’s Crisis of Legitimacy

A Critique of The Reckoning and Its Representation of International Criminal Justice

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2011
Auteurs Jeff Handmaker
Auteursinformatie

Jeff Handmaker
Jeff Handmaker is senior lecturer in law, human rights and development at the International Institute of Social Studies (ISS) of Erasmus University Rotterdam and honorary research fellow at the School of Law of the University of the Witwatersrand.

Tobias Arnoldussen
Tobias Arnoldussen is a PhD candidate at the department of Sociology of Law of Erasmus University Rotterdam and he teaches courses in philosophy at the Dutch ‘Instituut voor Filosofie’. He also participates in the Erasmus Centre for Law and Society and the Research School Safety & Security in Society, (OMV).

Jeff Handmaker
Jeff Handmaker is lecturer in law, development and human rights at the International Institute of Social Studies of Erasmus University Rotterdam and honorary research fellow in the School of Law of the University of the Witwatersrand.
Discussie

Access_open Against the ‘Pestilential Gods’

Teubner on Human Rights

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 3 2011
Trefwoorden semiosphera, paranomia, Drittwirkung, matrix argument
Auteurs Pasquale Femia
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Examining the function of human rights in the semiosphere requires a strategy of differentiation: the dissolution of politics into political moments (politics, it is argued, is not a system, but a form of discourse); the distinction between discourse and communication; the concept of systemic paranomic functionings. Paranomia is a situation generated by the pathological closure of discourses, in which knowledge of valid and observed norms obscures power. Fundamental rights are the movement of communication, claims about redistributing powers, directed against paranomic functionings. Rethinking the debate about the third party effect implies that validity and coherence must be differentiated for the development of the ‘matrix argument’.


Pasquale Femia
Pasquale Femia is Professor of Private Law at the Faculty of Political Studies of the University of Naples II, Italy.
Discussie

Access_open The Destruction and Reconstruction of the Tower of Babel

A Comment to Gunther Teubner’s Plea for a ‘Common Law Constitution’

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 3 2011
Trefwoorden global society, constitutionalism, social systems theory, Teubner, law and order
Auteurs Bart van Klink
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article presents some critical comments concerning the conceptual, normative and institutional foundations of Teubner’s plea for a ‘common law constitution’. My comments question the desirability of the means chosen for attaining this objective as well as their efficacy. In particular, I have difficulties with the ambivalent role that is assigned to man, either as a person or as a human being; with the reduction of social problems to problems of communication; and, finally and most importantly, with the attempt to conceive of law and politics beyond established legal and political institutions, which in my view is doomed to fail. The conclusion offers some tentative suggestions for an alternative approach.


Bart van Klink
Bart van Klink is Professor of Legal Methodology at the Faculty of Law of the VU University Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Discussie

Dik of dun?

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2011
Trefwoorden European Court of Human Rights, constitutional questions, fundamental principles of justice, judicial activism
Auteurs Thierry Baudet
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In a footnote on the last page of her article, Janneke Gerards writes: ‘Here I will leave to one side the debate on the involvement of the ECHR with questions that are not really constitutional.’ But it is precisely the involvement of the ECHR with questions that are ‘not really constitutional’ – and therefore not really fundamental – that the debate is about. It is regrettable that those who are indignant about my critique of the course that the ECHR is currently taking hardly – if ever – respond to my arguments against such an expansive course. The fact that the Court is now facing a pile of waiting cases rapidly approaching 200,000, as well as problems of legitimacy after taking a stand in undeniably political cases such as prisoners’ voting rights, limits to the freedom of speech, as well as its hinting that it would disapprove of a ban on the burqa, all undermine and impede what the ECHR was originally set up for: to be an effective, swift and authoritative voice in the protection of ‘fundamental principles of justice’. By indulging in meddlesomeness and political correctness, the ECHR is digging its own grave.


Thierry Baudet
Thierry Baudet studeerde geschiedenis en rechten aan de Universiteit van Amsterdam en zit thans in de eindfase van zijn promotieonderzoek in de rechtsfilosofie aan de Universiteit Leiden. Tevens schrijft hij een tweewekelijkse column voor NRC Handelsblad.
Discussie

De waarde van een Europees mensenrechtenhof

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2011
Trefwoorden European Court of Human Rights, judicial review, fundamental rights, supranational protection of human rights
Auteurs Janneke Gerards
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Over the last few months, the European Court of Human Rights has been heavily criticised in the Dutch media and by Dutch politicians. Although the criticism is mainly directed at the perceived overextension of the Court’s fundamental rights protection, it also concentrates on fundamental issues such as the interference with national sovereignty that is affected by supranational adjudication and the anti-democratic character of supranational judicial review. In this contribution to the debate, it is argued that the present criticism of the Court is largely misconceived. Although the Court and its case law should certainly not be accepted uncritically, the arguments on which the criticism is based either lack nuance or disregard the Court’s specific function as a protector of fundamental rights. To provide a better basis for sensible and relevant criticism of how the Court functions, this contribution therefore aims to revisit the main roles of the European Convention on Human Rights and of international human rights protection, as well as the classic debate on judicial review.


Janneke Gerards
Janneke Gerards is als onderzoekshoogleraar fundamentele rechten verbonden aan de Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen. Deze bijdrage is een uitwerking van de bijdrage die zij leverde aan een debatbijeenkomst over de rol van het EHRM die op 12 mei 2011 plaatsvond aan de Universiteit van Amsterdam.
Discussie

Technoregulering: regulering of ‘slechts’ disciplinering

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 1 2011
Trefwoorden regulation by technology, code as law, legitimacy, rule of law, regulation
Auteurs Ronald Leenes
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In this contribution Ronald Leenes discusses the implications of technoregulation, i.e. regulation by means of technology. Starting from Julia Black’s definition of regulation he discusses how technologies are used to alter or modify human behaviour. One of the objections he raises concerns the intransparency of the norm that is thus enforced, and he argues that technoregulation easily becomes administration or discipline rather than law.


Ronald Leenes
Ronald Leenes is geïnteresseerd in de rol die technologie speelt en kan spelen in het reguleren van menselijk gedrag en binnen welke randvoorwaarden dit plaats moet vinden. Toepassingsgebieden hiervan binnen zijn huidige blikveld zijn privacy, identiteit en identiteitsmanagement, en intellectueel eigendom. Hij is betrokken (geweest) bij onderzoek op het gebied van biometrie, human enhancement, RFID, Ambient Intelligence en nanotechnologie. Hij heeft in verschillende (KP6 en KP7) Europese onderzoeksprojecten gewerkt op het gebied van privacy en identeit(smanagement). Hij is tevens betrokken bij diverse nationale onderzoeksprojecten rond online-identiteit.
Discussie

Technologische en juridische normativiteit: het tekort van het reguleringsparadigma

Een respons op Leenes’ ‘Technoregulering’

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 1 2011
Trefwoorden regulation by technology, code as law, legitimacy, rule of law, regulation
Auteurs Mireille Hildebrandt
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Mireille Hildebrandt responds to the article of Ronald Leenes. She largely agrees with Leenes’ objection that technoregulation threatens to conflate rule-making (a task of the legislator) with administration (a task of the executive). In her reply she rejects the external perspective that is inherent in regulation as behaviour-modification, arguing that legal subjects are not to be seen as mere objects of regulation. At the same time she calls for a reflection on the normative implications of technological infrastructures for existing legal rights, e.g., on privacy, even if these implications were not intended by a regulator.


Mireille Hildebrandt
Mireille Hildebrandt is hoogleraar ICT en rechtsstaat aan de Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen, hoofddocent rechtstheorie aan de Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam en senior onderzoeker aan Law Science Technology and Society Studies (LSTS) aan de Vrije Universiteit Brussel. Haar onderzoek richt zich in het bijzonder op de implicaties van slimme (proactieve) omgevingen voor rechtsstaat en democratie. Zij was deelprojectleider van het Europese KP6-project the Future of Identity in Information Society (FIDIS) en is momenteel betrokken bij het Europese KP7-project Security Impact Assessment Measurement (SIAM). Zij is naar Brussel gedetacheerd op het fundamenteel onderzoeksproject Law and Autonomic Computing. Mutual Transformations, redigeerde samen met Serge Gutwirth Profiling the European citizen. Cross-disciplinary perspectives (Springer: Dordrecht 2008) en samen met Antoinette Rouvory Law, human agency and autonomic computing. The philosophy of law meets the philosophy of technology (Routledge: New York 2011).
Discussie

Access_open Plugging the Legitimacy Gap? The Ubiquity of Human Rights and the Rhetoric of Global Constitutionalism

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 3 2010
Trefwoorden global constitutionalism, legitimacy, human rights, Neil Walker, post-state democracy
Auteurs Morag Goodwin
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This paper approaches Walker’s work from the perspective of the ubiquity of human rights language within the rhetoric of global constitutionalism. Building on Walker’s description of the relationship between constitutionalism and democracy, what I wish to suggest is that the spread of human rights discourse is intimately connected with attempts to apply constitutional discourse beyond the state. By highlighting the way in which human rights have become place-takers for political legitimacy in discussions of international constitutionalism, the paper is intended to challenge Walker to state his own position more forcefully and to develop further his insight concerning the irresolvable tension in the iterative relationship between constitutionalism and democracy.


Morag Goodwin
Morag Goodwin is Assistant Professor of Law and Development at the Tilburg Institute for Law, Technology and Society at Tilburg Law School, the Netherlands.
Discussie

Access_open The Co-originality of Law and Democracy in the Moral Horizon of Modernity

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 3 2010
Trefwoorden co-originality, deliberative democracy, Habermas, Lefort, modernity
Auteurs Stefan Rummens
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This paper argues that Neil Walker’s analysis of the complementary relationship between democracy and constitutionalism remains one-sided. It focuses only on the incompleteness of democracy and the democracy-realizing function of constitutionalism rather than also taking into account the reverse complementary and constitution-realizing function of democracy. In this paper, I defend a fuller account that takes into account this mutual complementarity between democracy and constitutionalism. Such an alternative approach is consequential for Walker’s argument in two respects. In terms of the general analysis of the relationship between democracy and constitutionalism, my adjusted approach leads to a defence of the Habermasian thesis of the co-originality of constitutionalism and democracy which is too quickly dismissed by Walker himself. A fuller appreciation of this co-originality suggests that the relationship between constitutionalism and democracy is perhaps, after all, more singularly complementary (as opposed to being both complementary and oppositional) than Walker recognizes. In terms of the more specific analysis of the impact of globalization, this adjusted approach tilts the argument in favour of the critics of current practices of postnational constitutionalism. Without complementary postnational democratic structures, this constitutionalism remains problematic and potentially oppressive.


Stefan Rummens
Stefan Rummens is Assistant Professor of Political Theory at the Institute for Management Research of the Radboud University Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Discussie

Access_open Constitutionalism and the Incompleteness of Democracy

A Reply to Four Critics

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 3 2010
Trefwoorden constitutionalism, globalization, democracy, modernity, postnational
Auteurs Neil Walker
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This reply to critics reinforces and further develops a number of conclusions of the original paper. First, it answers the charge that it is biased in its discussion of the relative standing of constitutionalism and democracy today, tending to take the authority of the former for granted and concentrating its critical attention unduly on the incompleteness of democracy, by arguing that contemporary constitutionalism is deeply dependent upon democracy. Secondly, it reiterates and extends the claim of the original paper that the idea and practice of democracy is unable to supply its own resources in the development of just forms of political organization. Thirdly, it defends its key understanding of the overall relationship between democracy and constitutionalism as a ‘double relationship’, involving both mutual support and mutual tension. A fourth and last point is concerned to demonstrate how the deeper philosophical concerns raised by the author about the shifting relationship between democracy and constitutionalism and the conceptual reframing they prompt are important not just as an explanatory and evaluative window on an evolving configuration of political relations but also as an expression of that evolution, and to indicate how this new conceptual frame might condition how we approach the question of a democracy-sensitive institutional architecture for the global age.


Neil Walker
Neil Walker is Regius Professor of Public Law and the Law of Nature and Nations at the University of Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Discussie

Access_open Democracy, Constitutionalism and the Question of Authority

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 3 2010
Trefwoorden international constitutionalism, democracy, international law, fragmentation, international politics
Auteurs Wouter G. Werner
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This paper agrees with Walker on the existence of a tension between democracy and constitutionalism, but questions whether democracy and (international) constitutionalism necessarily depend on each other. While democracy needs constitutionalism on normative grounds, as an empirical matter it may also rest on alternative political structures. Moreover, it is questionable whether democracy is indeed the solution to the incompleteness of international constitutionalism. Traditional forms of democracy do not lend themselves well to transplantation to the international level and could even intensify some problems of international governance. Attempts to democratize international relations should be carried out prudentially, with due regard for possible counterproductive effects.


Wouter G. Werner
Wouter Werner is Professor of Public International Law at VU University, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Discussie

Kenneth Burke en de dramaconstitutie

Tijdschrift RegelMaat, Aflevering 1 2009
Trefwoorden constitutionele toetsing, grondwetsinterpretatie, dramademocratie, Kenneth Burke
Auteurs Prof. dr. W.J. Witteveen
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Met de aanvaarding van het initiatief-wetsontwerp Halsema door de Eerste Kamer gaat de discussie over constitutionele toetsing een nieuwe fase in. Om oude patstellingen te doorbreken is een nieuw perspectief nodig. Uit de Amerikaanse ontwikkeling van het toetsingsrecht kunnen we leren dat de Grondwet een centralere plaats zal krijgen in het politieke debat, maar niet dat er hetzelfde type politieke strijd rond een gepolitiseerde rechtspraak door zal ontstaan. Uit de analyse die Kenneth Burke maakt van de interpretatiestrijd over de constitutie komt veeleer het beeld naar voren van een afstandelijk en rationeel type discussie dat een waardevolle aanvulling betekent op de intense, maar ook kortzichtige debatten van onze dramademocratie.


Prof. dr. W.J. Witteveen
Prof. dr. W.J. Witteveen is hoogleraar rechtstheorie en retorica aan de Universiteit van Tilburg.
Discussie

Naar een betere afstemming van de controle van standaardvoorwaarden in een Europees contractenrecht

Tijdschrift Contracteren, Aflevering 03 2005
Trefwoorden beding, contract, standaardvoorwaarden, consument, vereniging, overeenkomst, consumentenovereenkomst, lidstaat, model, wetgeving
Auteurs O.O. Cherednychenko en F.W. Grosheide

O.O. Cherednychenko

F.W. Grosheide
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.