scholarly journals The Differend of Justice: Violence and Redemption in Dworkin's Justice for Hedgehogs

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 158-173
Author(s):  
CHARLES OLNEY

AbstractThis article uses Ronald Dworkin's argument for the unity of value to explore the redemptive core of modern legal order. Dworkin establishes a formal unity: all legal claims reside within a linked framework of moral justification. However, Jean-Francois Lyotard's concept of the differend exposes a lingering gap. Arguments within a moral universe do inevitably converge, but such unity is only possible due to the formative violence enacted by such orders. Dworkin hopes to provide the definitive statement against moral subjectivity, but in its purest form, he proves precisely the opposite. The lesson to draw from Dworkin's work is that ‘justice’ is ultimately only the means by which political orders categorize and thereby sustain their own formative acts of exclusion under the guise of offering their redemption.

2016 ◽  
Vol 24 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 135-150
Author(s):  
Iztok Rakar ◽  
Bojan Tičar

Legitimacy in the system of criminal justice can be understood, inter alia, as a moral justification of authority. In relation to legitimacy, legality means that within the legal order and legal justice of a democratic state, state bodies are only allowed to do that which is permitted through legal rules. Legitimacy and morality are broader categories than legality and legal justice. In the field of criminal justice, legitimacy is rooted in Tyler’s understanding (1990), which states that recognition of legitimacy plays a key role in obedience before the law. Bennetta-Capersa (2008) takes the view that less strict enforcement of the laws and more police work in the community can reduce the crime rate in society as a whole. This paper’s positive contribution lies more or less in the substantial applicability of terms that have been properly delineated within a social science framework.


2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (2020) (2) ◽  
pp. 1-11
Author(s):  
Milson Xavier ◽  

he Coronavirus pandemic that spread around the world in the first half of 2020 brought impacts to society that will be registered for an extended period. In this paper, the effects showed an impossibility to maintain the progress of mineral research made by professionals in the academic and scientific areas. In an attempt to find justifications in the legal order of the mineral industry, to continue the work, it was faced with imposing environmental legislation that made a claim even more difficult. It was found that the Mining Code in place no longer regulates the activities of extraction of mineral specimens for museums, educational establishments and other scientific purposes. This left the legal security tied only to the interpretation of legal provisions in articles of the code and its regulation, as well as procedure manuals for environmental inspection bodies, and therefore, subject to the consequences of legal disputes with final decisions in higher courts, given the claim of superiority of the environmental issue over mining. Keywords: Coronavirus, pandemic, environmental legislation, mining code


2014 ◽  
pp. 13-31
Author(s):  
Katarzyna Grzelak-Bach

Following a brief introduction of article 6 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the author begins by analyzing case law from the European Court of Human Rights regarding the legal reasoning in judicial proceedings. The main premise of this paper is to present a formula for preparing legal reasoning in administrative court proceedings. The author draws attention to the role of judges who, in the process of adjudication, should apply creative interpretation of the rules of law, when they see errors or omissions in legislative provisions, or blatant violations of the European legal order. The conclusion of those deliberations finds, that the process of tailoring the approach to meet Strasbourg’s requirements should, on a basic level, be at the discretion of judges rather than the legislators.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document