Biolaw Stakes, Activist Jurisprudence, and (Presumed) Limits for Protected Interests

Bronik Matwijkiw, Anja Matwijkiw
{"title":"Biolaw Stakes, Activist Jurisprudence, and (Presumed) Limits for Protected Interests","authors":"Bronik Matwijkiw, Anja Matwijkiw","doi":"10.1163/15718123-01761384","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This essay shows that the emerging phenomenon called biolaw would benefit from philosophically critical exercises to secure a good fit with international criminal law (ICL). Although legal experts agree to treat ICL as the primary framework for conceptualisation and dynamic realisation (through norm-conferment, – implementation and -enforcement), the implied (bio)law-and-(bio)ethics integration can still be construed in different ways, thereby paving more than one path for biolaw. With the emphasis on transplant-related crimes, the authors try to capture a notion of important biolaw stakes, which provides direction-posts for the inescapable marketplace discussion. The argument draws on a broad stakeholder jurisprudence that does not overplay the distinction between capitalism and altruism – to avoid the abandonment of vulnerable cum poor stakeholders. Critically, theories may look like instances of activist jurisprudence, lines of argument and reasoning that would (better) explain, (re)direct and (ethically) enhance the realm, but which nevertheless fail substantively or procedurally, or both.","PeriodicalId":431200,"journal":{"name":"Biolaw and International Criminal Law","volume":"16 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-11-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biolaw and International Criminal Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718123-01761384","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This essay shows that the emerging phenomenon called biolaw would benefit from philosophically critical exercises to secure a good fit with international criminal law (ICL). Although legal experts agree to treat ICL as the primary framework for conceptualisation and dynamic realisation (through norm-conferment, – implementation and -enforcement), the implied (bio)law-and-(bio)ethics integration can still be construed in different ways, thereby paving more than one path for biolaw. With the emphasis on transplant-related crimes, the authors try to capture a notion of important biolaw stakes, which provides direction-posts for the inescapable marketplace discussion. The argument draws on a broad stakeholder jurisprudence that does not overplay the distinction between capitalism and altruism – to avoid the abandonment of vulnerable cum poor stakeholders. Critically, theories may look like instances of activist jurisprudence, lines of argument and reasoning that would (better) explain, (re)direct and (ethically) enhance the realm, but which nevertheless fail substantively or procedurally, or both.
生物法律的利害关系,维权法理学,和(假定的)保护利益的限度
这篇文章表明,被称为生物法的新兴现象将受益于哲学批判性练习,以确保与国际刑法(ICL)很好地契合。尽管法律专家同意将ICL视为概念化和动态实现的主要框架(通过规范的授予、实施和执行),但隐含的(生物)法律和(生物)伦理的整合仍然可以用不同的方式来解释,从而为生物法铺平了不止一条道路。通过强调与移植相关的犯罪,作者试图抓住重要生物法律利益的概念,这为不可避免的市场讨论提供了方向。该论点借鉴了广泛的利益相关者法理,没有夸大资本主义和利他主义之间的区别,以避免抛弃弱势和贫穷的利益相关者。批判地说,理论可能看起来像激进法理学的实例,可以(更好地)解释、(重新)指导和(道德上)加强领域的论证和推理路线,但却在实质上或程序上失败了,或者两者兼而有之。
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信