Understanding the Different Dimensions of Human Dignity: Analysis of the Decision of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Slovenia on the »Tito Street« Case

Petra Kleindienst
{"title":"Understanding the Different Dimensions of Human Dignity: Analysis of the Decision of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Slovenia on the »Tito Street« Case","authors":"Petra Kleindienst","doi":"10.1515/danb-2017-0009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In 2011, the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Slovenia made a historical decision on the ‘Tito street’ case, thereby placing human dignity at the centre of the constitutional order. A few years later, some related doubts not resolved by the Constitutional Court remain. For instance, the Court argues that an exhaustive a priori definition of human dignity is impossible since the notion depends on the development of its historical and ethical substance over time. The question thus arises of why legislation states that human dignity is universal even though it can be perceived as being a product of time and place. In this paper, we strive to answer this question by arguing that human dignity has two dimensions, initial dignity and realised dignity, and interpret the Court’s decision from a new angle. Thereby, the aim of this paper is to build a conceptual framework of human dignity and discuss it from a fresh perspective as well as to prove its applicability by presenting Slovenian constitutional case law. The paper offers significant insights into the discussion and may therefore help to improve future interpretations of human dignity in the field of constitutional case law.","PeriodicalId":208928,"journal":{"name":"DANUBE: Law and Economics Review","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"12","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"DANUBE: Law and Economics Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/danb-2017-0009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

Abstract

Abstract In 2011, the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Slovenia made a historical decision on the ‘Tito street’ case, thereby placing human dignity at the centre of the constitutional order. A few years later, some related doubts not resolved by the Constitutional Court remain. For instance, the Court argues that an exhaustive a priori definition of human dignity is impossible since the notion depends on the development of its historical and ethical substance over time. The question thus arises of why legislation states that human dignity is universal even though it can be perceived as being a product of time and place. In this paper, we strive to answer this question by arguing that human dignity has two dimensions, initial dignity and realised dignity, and interpret the Court’s decision from a new angle. Thereby, the aim of this paper is to build a conceptual framework of human dignity and discuss it from a fresh perspective as well as to prove its applicability by presenting Slovenian constitutional case law. The paper offers significant insights into the discussion and may therefore help to improve future interpretations of human dignity in the field of constitutional case law.
理解人类尊严的不同维度:对斯洛文尼亚共和国宪法法院关于“铁托街”案的判决的分析
2011年,斯洛文尼亚共和国宪法法院就“铁托街”案做出了历史性裁决,从而将人的尊严置于宪法秩序的中心。几年后,宪法法院仍未解决一些相关疑问。例如,法院认为,对人类尊严作出详尽的先验定义是不可能的,因为这一概念取决于其历史和伦理实质随时间的发展。这样就产生了一个问题,为什么立法规定人的尊严是普遍的,即使它可以被认为是时间和地点的产物。在本文中,我们试图通过论证人的尊严有两个维度,即初始尊严和实现尊严,来回答这个问题,并从一个新的角度来解释法院的判决。因此,本文的目的是建立一个人类尊严的概念框架,并从一个新的角度来讨论它,并通过介绍斯洛文尼亚宪法判例法来证明其适用性。本文为讨论提供了重要的见解,因此可能有助于改善宪法判例法领域对人类尊严的未来解释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信