Universitätspublikationen
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (337)
- Review (222)
- Working Paper (183)
- Conference Proceeding (116)
- Part of Periodical (61)
- Book (46)
- Contribution to a Periodical (39)
- Doctoral Thesis (28)
- Part of a Book (15)
- Report (5)
Language
- German (737)
- English (287)
- Italian (11)
- French (5)
- Portuguese (5)
- Multiple languages (4)
- Spanish (3)
- mis (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (1053) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (1053)
Keywords
- Coronavirus (12)
- Urheberrecht (11)
- Democracy (9)
- human rights (8)
- Bundesverfassungsgericht (7)
- Digital Services Act (7)
- Law (7)
- law (7)
- Internet (6)
- Konfliktlösung (6)
Institute
- Rechtswissenschaft (1053) (remove)
Since the XIX century, a pleiad of philosophers and historians support the idea that Greek philosophy, usually reported to have started with the presocratics, lays its basis in a previous moment: the Greek myths – systematized by Homer and Hesiod – and the Greek arts, in particular the lyric and tragedy literature. According to this, it is important to retrieve philosophical elements even before the pre-Socratics to understand the genesis of specific concepts in Philosophy of Law. Besides, assuming that the Western’s core values are inherited from Ancient Greece, it is essential to recuperate the basis of our own justice idea, through the Greek myths and tragedy literature. As a case study, this paper aims on the comparison of two key-works, each one representing a phase of the Greek tragedy: The Orestea, by Aeschylus, and Orestes, by Euripides. Both contain the same story, telling how the Greeks understood the necessity of solving their conflicts not by blood revenge, but through a political way, and also the political drama. Although, in Aeschylus’s one, men still leashed by their fate, while the gods play a major role, in order to punish human pride (hybris). In a different way, on Euripides’s work men face their own loneliness, in a world fulfilled with gods, each one demanding divergent actions. That represents a necessary moment to the flourishing freedom and human subjectivity, and, once the exterior divinity is unable to resolve human problems, men will need to discover their interior divinity: that is how the Philosophy emerges.
Dworkin`s political theory is characterized by the interpretative integrity of morality, law, and politics, the so-called “hedgehog’s approach”. The interpretative integrity approach functions on multiple levels. Firstly, philosophical foundations of his theory of justice are linked to his conception of just liberal society and state. Secondly, from the perspective of political morality, interpretative concepts of law and morality are internally connected, in addition to interpretative concepts of equality, liberty, and democracy. Thirdly, from the perspective of philosophical foundations, individual ethics, personal morality and political morality are mutually connected. The aforementioned ethical and moral foundations are also related – in a wider sense of philosophical foundations - with his gnoseological conception regarding value concepts in law, politics and morality, and with his episthemological conception regarding an objective truth in the field of values, in a sense that the value concepts are interpretative and can be objectively true when articulated in accordance with methodological rules and standards of a »reflexive equilibrium« and an interpretative integrity, and in accordance with the so-called internal scepticism in the context of value pluralism.
The term “ethics” in a “narrower” sense refers to individual ethics, the study of how to live well, while the “ethics” in a “broader” sense refers to personal morality, the study of how we must treat other people. The term “morality” however, is used primarily to denote a political morality, the issue of how a sovereign power should treat its citizens.
Philosophical foundations of Dworkin`s political theory of justice, his conception of two cardinal values of humanity, his concievement of individual ethics, personal morality and political morality will be in the focus of consideration.
Although their applications have not yet extended widely due to their incipient state, nano-technologies and nano-medicines may be presumed to be at the origin of the next great technological revolution, foreseeably contributing to a new stage with respect to evolutions in mankind’s progress. Their possibilities are truly immense in enormously varied spheres, but the risks and uncertainties they engender are enormous too. Because access and use of the unceasingly increasing mega-quantity of information they generate will place further strain on the protection of personal life, privacy, the exercise of freedom, as well as the safeguarding of other fundamental principles and rights.
Legal practitioners and legal scientists need to have knowledge of the general rules that apply in the legal system. This involves both knowledge of the legislation and knowledge of the decisions by judges that function as general rules of law. Law students preparing themselves for the legal profession need to acquire these kinds of knowledge. A student has to have knowledge about where to look for decisions, understand the structure of decisions and learn to determine what makes a decision relevant to the body of applicable rules in the legal system. Legal education primarily aims at acquiring insight in the legal sources, their history and background. This basic knowledge is of great importance; legal problem solving is hardly possible without an understanding of the legal knowledge. To illustrate the use of this knowledge in practice, teachers work through decisions as examples. However, it is difficult, if not impossible, to learn by explanation or by imitation alone. A more effective way to obtain expertise is by actually performing the task, i.e. students should do the exercises, while the teacher provides feedback on their solutions. For effective learning, also the solution process should be monitored and provided with feedback. Furthermore it is desirable for students to be able to ask for help at any time during the process. They should also be able to practice over and over again. An ideal situation would have a teacher available for every student, monitoring the student while practicing and providing support where and whenever necessary. However, this being not practically feasible, the second best option is to offer the student electronic support.
CASE (Case Analysis and Structuring Environment) is an environment where a law student can practice with finding decisions, with structuring its text and with analysing the decision in order to be able to determine in what way it adds to the body of applicable rules in the legal system.
CASE is developed using a principled and structured design approach. A short description of this approach is followed by an analysis of the learning task, the difficulties law students experience and the remedies proposed on the basis of both the task analysis and the stated difficulties. This is followed by a description of architecture, functionality, platform and implementation of CASE and a description of a session with CASE and future work.
In the intersection between law, science and technology lies the debate on the overcoming of the boundaries of the biological structure of the human being and its implications on the idea of human rights, on the concept of person and on the conception of equality – being the latter a fundamental tenet of a democracy.
Posthumanism assumes a biological inadequacy of the human body regarding the quantity, complexity and quality of information which it can muster. The same occurs with the needs of accuracy, speed or strength demanded by the contemporary environment. Under such perspective, the body is considered to be an inefficient structure, with a short lifespan, easy to break and hard to fix.
The body, always seen as the locus for the definition of human, emerges as the object of a commodification process that seeks to exonerate men from their burden - by declination towards a virtual existence, totally free and rational - or to enhance them with bionic devices or drugs.
This issue has already been the subject of attention by many scholars like Savulescu, Rodotà, Broston, Fukuyama and even Habermas.
Therefore, the aim of this paper is to seek, by criticism and revision of the positions on the foreseen problems of this process, an adequate theoretical approach on issues like the concept of person and its connection with the idea of human rights in order to promote the fundamental statement that all men are equal without disregard to the values of diversity and personal identity.
In this article the author, in the context of the fiftieth anniversary of H.L.A. Hart’s “The Concept of Law”, reconsiders the moderate indeterminacy of law thesis, which derives from the open texture of language. For that purpose, he intends: first, to analyze Hart’s moderate indeterminacy thesis, i.e. determinacy in “easy cases” and indeterminacy in “hard cases”, which resembles Aristotle’s "doctrine of the mean"; second, to criticize his moderate indeterminacy thesis as failing to embody the virtues of a center in between the vices of the extremes, by insisting that the exercise of discretion required constitutes an “interstitial” legislation; and, third, to reorganize an argument for a truly “mean” position, which requires a form of weak interpretative discretion, instead of a strong legislative discretion.
Der vorliegende Beitrag leitete das Programm des Workshops „Schlichten und Richten – Differenzierung und Hybridisierung” (Frankfurt/Main, 9./10. Februar 2012) ein. Mit diesem Workshop begann das Arbeitsprogramm des LOEWE–Schwerpunkts „Außergerichtliche und gerichtliche Konfliktlösung“, der am 1. Januar 2012 seine Tätigkeit aufgenommen hatte (siehe hierzu www.konfliktloesung.eu; eine leicht veränderte Fassung des Beitrags in englischer Sprache wird in Kürze abrufbar sein unter: http://www.ssrn.com/link/Max-Planck-Legal-History-RES.html ). Der Ausgangspunkt des Workshops ist eine deutsche Debattentradition, die die Alternativität von gerichtlichen und nichtgerichtlichen, kontradiktorischen oder konsensualen sowie mehr formalisierten und mehr informalisierten Konfliktlösungsformen unter dem Schlagwort „Schlichten oder Richten“ (auch „Schlichten statt Richten“ oder „Schlichten oder Richten“) thematisierte.
Der Beitrag problematisiert zunächst die bisherige mangelnde rechtshistorische Aufmerksamkeit, die Alternativen zur gerichtlichen Konfliktlösung zugewandt wurde. Er weist daraufhin, dass auch die heutige Diskussion über gelungenes Konfliktlösungsmanagement oft explizit oder implizit von – zuweilen nicht ausreichend reflektierten – historischen Vorannahmen geprägt ist und – damit verbunden – von Vorstellungen über rechtskulturelle Fremdheit und Nähe.
Im zweiten und dritten Abschnitt skizziert der Beitrag kurz den historischen Gang der deutschen Diskussion über „Schlichten und Richten“ seit dem Aufkommen auch rechtswissenschaftlich anerkannter Schlichtungsinstitutionen zu Beginn des 20. Jahrhunderts. Er versucht, deren wechselnde zeitgenössische Kontexte sichtbar zu machen und zeigt, wie sich in diesen Diskussionen (zuweilen utopisch scheinende) rechtspolitische Verheißungen ansiedeln konnten, welch fruchtbaren Boden diese Diskussionen aber auch für neue Kategorienbildungen und multidisziplinäre Zugänge bot.
Im vierten Abschnitt wird versucht, Verknüpfungen mit der gegenwärtigen ADR-Diskussionen herzustellen, während im fünften Abschnitt in analytischer Absicht Konfigurationen des Wortpaars „Schlichten“ und „Richten“ vorgestellt werden: „Schlichten“ und „Richten“ als Alternative, als Abhängigkeitsverhältnis und als Abfolge. Der fünfte Abschnitt schließlich fragt nach Funktionselementen und den Funktionsbedingungen von Schlichten und Richten, d.h.: Welche Leitrationalitäten, Partizipationsmechanismen, Legitimationsnarrative und Reflexionsformen lassen sich jeweils der einen oder anderen Form der Konfliktlösung zuordnen.
All diese Überlegungen sind eher tentativer Art und vermitteln nur erste umrisshafte Vorstellungen. Sie dienen in erster Linie dem Diskussionsanstoß und sollen erste Schneisen in dieses komplexe Forschungsfeld schlagen. Die Vortragsform ist beibehalten und der Fußnotenapparat ist auf das nötige Minimum reduziert.
O presente artigo tem como objetivo a realização de uma aproximação entre a Teoria do Reconhecimento de Axel Honneth, representante da Escola de Frankfurt, com a teoria do Bem Jurídico penal. Acredita-se que, desse modo, possa ser feito contributo para melhor elucidar as aporias do conceito de bem jurídico penal. Portanto, pretende-se explicitar que a Teoria do Reconhecimento oferece um arcabouço teórico que permite o desenvolvimento e fundamentação de um Direito Penal voltado à proteção de bens jurídicos, no contexto de um Estado Democrático do Direito, que, ao mesmo tempo, não ignora e, pelo contrário, permite a compreensão da lógica moral dos conflitos sociais.
O artigo investiga a formação, a carreira e os trabalhos de Max Weber como jurista, assim como delineia as linhas gerais do impacto e das influências de sua formação jurídica na sua obra em geral. Especial atenção merece sua tese de doutorado sobre as sociedades comerciais na Idade Média, que é apresentada em sua problematização geral e em suas principais ideias. Com isso, procura-se indicar como os problemas tratados por Weber em sua tese de doutorado - sua principal obra jurídica - antecipam temas e problemas que serão desenvolvidos na obra posterior de modo ampliado e aprofundado.
Law making becomes an increasingly important function of the higher courts in civil law matters. This observation leads to the question of whether the law making function is nevertheless carried out in a “classical” legal-principled way or whether the courts increasingly employ a political-formative style. To answer this question, one should not only focus on the content of the courts’ reasoning but also on their procedural-institutional framework. From that perspective, the processing of so-called legislative facts is a key issue in determining the role of courts between legal reasoning and social engineering. The paper shows that Germany, England and the United States pursue different lines in processing legislative facts. Notwithstanding these differences, it seems to be the case that the increasing importance of law making will also change the institutional framework of appellate courts towards a quasi-legislative forum.
Eine wesentliche Voraussetzung für die Entschlüsselung herrschender Justizverständnisse ist die Auseinandersetzung mit den Rollen, die die beteiligten Akteure in einem Rechtssystem einnehmen sowie die Untersuchung der rechtlichen und institutionellen Bedingungen unter denen diese Akteure handeln. Der vorliegende Beitrag beschäftigt sich zunächst mit der Macht- und Aufgabenverteilung zwischen Richtern und Parteien. Dabei wird deutlich, dass die Rollenallokation nicht einheitlich ist, sondern in Abhängigkeit von unterschiedlichen verfahrensrechtlichen und institutionellen Voraussetzungen variiert. In Verfahren vor einer Jury wird die richterliche Autorität durch eine maximal ausgeprägte Parteiautonomie stark eingeschränkt. Als Rechthonoratioren (im Weberschen Sinne) agieren Richter dagegen immer dann, wenn Sie ohne Geschworene Recht sprechen. Dies geschieht insbesondere in den einzelstaatlichen Obergerichten und den Bundesberufungsgereichten, aber auch in Verfahren erster Instanz, in denen „claims in equity“ zu entscheiden sind. Der Beitrag beschäftigt sich abschließend mit dem Einfluss, den die Besonderheiten der amerikanischen Juristenausbildung auf das amerikanische Justizverständnis ausüben: Sie prägen und reproduzieren eine der Rollen und Selbstbilder unter amerikanischen Juristen, sowohl in der Anwaltschaft als auch auf Seiten der Richter.
Die Stellung der Grundrechte im europäischen Rechtsraum zeichnet eine tiefe Ambivalenz aus. Einerseits haben sie ihr Schattendasein im Unionsrecht hinter sich gelassen: Man denke an die Grundrechtecharta, den bevorstehenden Beitritt zur EMRK, das Bekenntnis zu einer grundrechtsorientierten Außenpolitik (Art. 21 Abs. 2 lit. b) EUV) und die strenge Überprüfung von Beitrittskandidaten. Andererseits gibt die Grundrechtslage in einigen Mitgliedstaaten Anlass zu erheblicher Sorge. Traurige Bekanntheit genießt die Situation von Minderheiten und Migranten. Maßgebliche Institutionen, wie der Europarat und die OSZE, sehen aber auch die Freiheit der Medien stark gefährdet. Ranglisten zur Pressefreiheit verzeichnen einen signifikanten Abstieg einiger EU-Mitgliedstaaten wegen Medienkonzentration, offener politischer Einflussnahme, unverhältnismäßiger Sanktionen, der Zweckentfremdung von Antiterrorgesetzgebung, unzureichenden Quellenschutzes und nicht aufgeklärter Gewaltakte gegen Journalisten. ...
Fundamental rights protection, once a side show, has become important for the EU, as proved by the newfound treaty recognition of the EU fundamental rights charter (CFREU), and the upcoming accession to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). At the same time the fundamental rights situation in a considerable number of Member States is an increasing cause for concern. This has mostly been illustrated with reference to minorities and asylum seekers. However, recent reports of organizations like the Council of Europe, the OSCE and various NGOs have also highlighted serious problems with regard to media freedom, such as overt political influence, media concentration, disproportionate sanctions on journalists, misuse of counter-terrorism legislation against the press, deficient protection of journalistic sources and failure to investigate violence against reporters. ...
The paper is concerned with the Hartian idea that the justification of law’s normativity can be traced back to the exquisite social fact, viz. special kind of social convention. After discussing the view that the rule of recognition is a coordinative convention A. Marmor’s idea of constitutive convention is introduced. Relying on J. Dickson’s brilliant enquiry I finally argue that this latter idea is deprieved of any explanatory power, which was pressuposed by H.L.A. Hart when he himself reffered to the conventional rule of recognition as social fact having full normative significance.
Der vorliegende Band enthält die Referate des 2. Familienrechtlichen Forums
Göttingen vom 2. Juli 2011, welches aktuelle Problemstellungen des Kindschaftsrechts
zum Gegenstand hatte. Vor dem Hintergrund jüngst abgeschlossener
und bevorstehender Gesetzesnovellen erörterten ausgewählte Experten
aus Wissenschaft, Politik und Praxis verschiedene Problemschwerpunkte: Zum
einen wurde die anstehende Novellierung des Sorgerechts nicht miteinander
verheirateter Eltern thematisiert und nach Lösungen für den Umgang mit dem
Umgangsboykott gesucht. Dabei eröffnete die interdisziplinäre und rechtsvergleichende
Annährung an die aufgeworfenen Probleme neue Perspektiven. Zum
anderen wurden die nur wenige Tage nach der Veranstaltung abgeschlossene
Vormundschaftsrechtsreform sowie das inzwischen ebenfalls in Kraft getretene
Bundeskinderschutzgesetz einer kritischen Würdigung unterzogen. Die Veranstaltung
endete mit einer kritischen Zwischenbilanz zum kindschaftsrechtlichen
Verfahren nach dem FamFG, das die Praxis vor zahlreiche Probleme stellt.
The concept of biopolitics has its origin on the Michel Foucault works developped since 1975 to 1979. In this period, the author introduced the foundations for a new approach about the modern government, based in both crescent enpowerment on individuals and the control of populations. The theme has attracted the attentions of some critical political studies, with many practical uses. However, I believe there is not enough consolidation about biopolitics as a concept and a comprehensive theory of the new political mechanisms. This uncertainness is more evident when the very role of Law is questioned in a biopolitical model, due to the archaic nature that Foucault gives to it. So the aim of the paper is to identify the theorical comprehension of biopolitics in a contemporary author as Giorgio Agamben to demonstrate his oppositions and proximities from the original idea of Michel Foucault. I propose that Agamben has the same difficulties of Foucault to deal with legal theory and Law inside biopolitics. Nevertheless, after a critical review on the works of this two authors, my conclusion is that a settlement of the concepts of Law and biopolitics depends of the surpassing of the Foucaldian version of Law as sovereignity, a clear delimitation of a common core between the authors and their differences and the research and affirmation of the concept of Law in Agamben, more well-refined than Foucault's one.