Judicializing Schmitt's "Legality and Legitimacy"
Identifikátory výsledku
Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI
<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216208%3A11220%2F22%3A10468050" target="_blank" >RIV/00216208:11220/22:10468050 - isvavai.cz</a>
Výsledek na webu
<a href="https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=vyDyj.L7ZZ" target="_blank" >https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=vyDyj.L7ZZ</a>
DOI - Digital Object Identifier
<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s42439-022-00062-9" target="_blank" >10.1007/s42439-022-00062-9</a>
Alternativní jazyky
Jazyk výsledku
angličtina
Název v původním jazyce
Judicializing Schmitt's "Legality and Legitimacy"
Popis výsledku v původním jazyce
In the "Preussen contra Reich" case of 1932, Carl Schmitt's theories on equal chance and law in extreme conditions are interpreted and applied in a court of law, firstly by Schmitt himself, then, going contrary to Schmitt's interpretation, by Dr. Arnold Brecht and Dr. Hans Peters. This paper will first present the basis of the two theories from Schmitt's "Legality and Legitimacy," namely, equal chance and the need for extraordinary measures. Then this paper will focus on the diverging legal interpretations of these two theories, as presented in court by different legal theorists. These divergent interpretations of "equal chance" and "law in extreme conditions," as presented in the aforementioned case, have yet to reach an international readership, as the case itself has never been fully translated into English. Finally, this paper will question the practical application of the two theories in the reality of the empirical world, which in turn question the relationship between any parliamentary legislative system and law. In doing so, the question of how the rule of law should be applied and understood within a liberal democracy is tackled.
Název v anglickém jazyce
Judicializing Schmitt's "Legality and Legitimacy"
Popis výsledku anglicky
In the "Preussen contra Reich" case of 1932, Carl Schmitt's theories on equal chance and law in extreme conditions are interpreted and applied in a court of law, firstly by Schmitt himself, then, going contrary to Schmitt's interpretation, by Dr. Arnold Brecht and Dr. Hans Peters. This paper will first present the basis of the two theories from Schmitt's "Legality and Legitimacy," namely, equal chance and the need for extraordinary measures. Then this paper will focus on the diverging legal interpretations of these two theories, as presented in court by different legal theorists. These divergent interpretations of "equal chance" and "law in extreme conditions," as presented in the aforementioned case, have yet to reach an international readership, as the case itself has never been fully translated into English. Finally, this paper will question the practical application of the two theories in the reality of the empirical world, which in turn question the relationship between any parliamentary legislative system and law. In doing so, the question of how the rule of law should be applied and understood within a liberal democracy is tackled.
Klasifikace
Druh
J<sub>ost</sub> - Ostatní články v recenzovaných periodicích
CEP obor
—
OECD FORD obor
50501 - Law
Návaznosti výsledku
Projekt
—
Návaznosti
I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace
Ostatní
Rok uplatnění
2022
Kód důvěrnosti údajů
S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů
Údaje specifické pro druh výsledku
Název periodika
Jus Cogens
ISSN
2524-3977
e-ISSN
2524-3985
Svazek periodika
Volume 4
Číslo periodika v rámci svazku
Issue 2
Stát vydavatele periodika
CH - Švýcarská konfederace
Počet stran výsledku
25
Strana od-do
155-179
Kód UT WoS článku
—
EID výsledku v databázi Scopus
—