在法律技术与法律政策之间——兼评汉斯·凯尔森的宪法理论

P. Sólyom
{"title":"在法律技术与法律政策之间——兼评汉斯·凯尔森的宪法理论","authors":"P. Sólyom","doi":"10.1017/cjlj.2017.18","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this article I seek to re-interpret some of the problems characteristic of Kelsen’s constitutional theory. I shall do so by making use of the Kelsenian perspectives of the legal scholar and the policy-maker as developed in his Pure Theory of Law. I shall argue that in his discussion of constitutional policy issues, Kelsen’s treatises mix legal theoretical arguments (related to the perspective of the legal scholar) with the practical approach of legal policy. My main contention is that political principles are more important for the use of Kelsen’s legal theoretical concepts than usually acknowledged in generally accepted interpretations. The Pure Theory of Law is based on the rejection of autocratic legal thinking, and may be regarded as a formalistic theory of law for a democratic rule of law. Such a conclusion, however, also means that Kelsen’s views concerning the methodology of legal theory are no longer tenable.","PeriodicalId":244583,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Law & Jurisprudence","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Between Legal Technique and Legal Policy: Remarks on Hans Kelsen’s Constitutional Theory\",\"authors\":\"P. Sólyom\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/cjlj.2017.18\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this article I seek to re-interpret some of the problems characteristic of Kelsen’s constitutional theory. I shall do so by making use of the Kelsenian perspectives of the legal scholar and the policy-maker as developed in his Pure Theory of Law. I shall argue that in his discussion of constitutional policy issues, Kelsen’s treatises mix legal theoretical arguments (related to the perspective of the legal scholar) with the practical approach of legal policy. My main contention is that political principles are more important for the use of Kelsen’s legal theoretical concepts than usually acknowledged in generally accepted interpretations. The Pure Theory of Law is based on the rejection of autocratic legal thinking, and may be regarded as a formalistic theory of law for a democratic rule of law. Such a conclusion, however, also means that Kelsen’s views concerning the methodology of legal theory are no longer tenable.\",\"PeriodicalId\":244583,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Canadian Journal of Law & Jurisprudence\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Canadian Journal of Law & Jurisprudence\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/cjlj.2017.18\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Journal of Law & Jurisprudence","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/cjlj.2017.18","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

在本文中,我试图重新解释凯尔森宪法理论的一些特征问题。我将利用凯尔森在他的《纯粹法律理论》中发展起来的法律学者和政策制定者的观点来做到这一点。我认为,在他对宪法政策问题的讨论中,凯尔森的论文将法律理论论点(与法律学者的观点有关)与法律政策的实践方法混合在一起。我的主要论点是,对于凯尔森法律理论概念的运用,政治原则比通常公认的解释更为重要。《纯粹法律理论》是建立在反对专制法律思想的基础上的,可以看作是一种民主法治的形式主义法律理论。然而,这样的结论也意味着凯尔森关于法学理论方法论的观点不再站得住脚。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Between Legal Technique and Legal Policy: Remarks on Hans Kelsen’s Constitutional Theory
In this article I seek to re-interpret some of the problems characteristic of Kelsen’s constitutional theory. I shall do so by making use of the Kelsenian perspectives of the legal scholar and the policy-maker as developed in his Pure Theory of Law. I shall argue that in his discussion of constitutional policy issues, Kelsen’s treatises mix legal theoretical arguments (related to the perspective of the legal scholar) with the practical approach of legal policy. My main contention is that political principles are more important for the use of Kelsen’s legal theoretical concepts than usually acknowledged in generally accepted interpretations. The Pure Theory of Law is based on the rejection of autocratic legal thinking, and may be regarded as a formalistic theory of law for a democratic rule of law. Such a conclusion, however, also means that Kelsen’s views concerning the methodology of legal theory are no longer tenable.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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