nach oben

Erschienen in:

2017 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

5. Kelsen and Contemporary Constitutionalism: The Continued Presence of Kelsenian Themes

verfasst von : Paolo Carrozza

Erschienen in: Kelsenian Legal Science and the Nature of Law

Verlag: Springer International Publishing

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

This chapter aims to demonstrate the enduring importance of Kelsen’s thought in contemporary constitutionalism and contends that constitutionalist are considerably more Kelsenian than is generally supposed. The chapter commences with a short reconstruction of three different periods in Kelsen’s legal thought: his contribution to Vienna law school under the influence of the German positivism; Kelsen’s commitment, from 1918 to 1933, to the newly-born Austrian republic; his forced emigration to the U.S.A. in 1940 and his encounter with the American school of law and political science. Kelsen’s contribution to contemporary constitutionalism begins with the great influence of his thought on the Austrian Constitution of 1920, which Kelsen defended in newspaper articles as well as in scholarly papers. The chapter maintains that Kelsenian legal science has continuing significance in two main fields of contemporary constitutionalism, both originated by the consideration of the constitution as a higher law: the first, the Austrian model for the judicial review of legislation, which shaped the European model of constitutional adjudication, nowadays diffused throughout the world; and the second, the ‘gradualist’ theory of the sources of law (the Stufenbau). It is argued that Kelsen’s legal thought has enduring import in the present-day crisis of constitutionalism not only for the legal understanding of multi-level government (monism v. dualism) but also for the globalization of constitutionalism and the idea of open-ended constitutionalism.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Vorheriges Kapitel Natural Law Systematics: Is There a ‘Grundnorm’ in Natural Law?

Nächstes Kapitel Constitutionalism and Value-Free Method: Kelsen’s Legacy in Contemporary Challenges

This is a tradition that has been studied deeply by these famous comparativists within the field of private law. However, the tradition has, in contrast, received less attention within the field of public law (see, for example, in relation to Italian administrative law, Cassese 1971).

Kelsen was, perhaps, the first jurist sought to intervene in the existing political debate through both the form of newspaper articles and form of academic writing in the form of books, article and reviews.

The emigration of Weimar and Austrian jurists to the U.S.A. still remains largely unexamined in the history of ideas and legal thinking, and the importance and impact that many jurists from Weimar or Austria such as Neumann, Kelsen, Fraenkel, Otto Kahn-Freund, Sinzheimer and Kirchheimer had in their new country could be better investigated: among the few works dealing with the American impact of Weimarian jurists see: on Sinzheimer, Coutu 2012; on Neumann and Kirchheimer, Scheuerman 1997; on Kirchheimer and Fraenkel, van Ooyen 2014; on Neumann, Salzborn 2009. In Italy there is only one piece of work which has been studied with more attention: the impact of Otto Kahn-Freund on the United Kingdom’s labour law, thanks to Gaetano Vardaro (see Vardaro 1982).

In 1921 Eduard Lambert, the then director of the Institut de Droit Comparé in Lyon (which he founded in 1920), published his famous pamphlet Le gouvernement des juges, opposing the introduction in France, and Europe as a whole, of the American approach to the judicial review of legislation (see, Lambert 1921).

This concept re-emerged among Italian legal scholars, because of the journal Politica del diritto (published since 1970 by Il Mulino), the primary theoretical journal of the Italian realist legal movement.

See Chapitre V (Du Pouvoir Judiciare), art. 3: Les tribunaux ne peuvent, ni s’immiscer dans l’exercice du Pouvoir législatif, ou suspendre l’exécution des lois, ni entreprendre sur les fonctions administratives, ou citer devant eux les administrateurs pour raison de leurs fonctions. [The courts cannot interfere in the exercise of legislative power, nor suspend the execution of laws, nor engage in administrative functions, nor summon before them administrators by reason of their functions]. On the question of the origin of the separation of powers doctrine, see Troper 1980, Blachèr 2001.

Renato Treves recounts that in September of 1932 he met Hans Kelsen in Cologne, where Kelsen gave him a manuscript of a new work (see Treves 1967, 12). This manuscript was then translated into italian by Treves and published in the journal Archivio Giuridico in 1933, before the publication of the German edition (see Kelsen 1933). Kelsen had intended to emigrate from Germany, and sought the translation of his works into languages other than German. According to Treves, the first version of Reine Rechtslehere in1933 was published, in addition, in Spanish, Swedish, Flemish and other European languages.

A similar process is evident, as a result of the existence and effect of European Court of Justice (ECJ) preliminary rulings. For evaluation of the relationship between the judges of the ECJ and judges of EU Member States concerning the provisions and application of domestic law within the framework of European law see, Weiler 1985, 217 ff.; Martinico 2008, 48 ff.

Barile, P. 1951. La Costituzione come norma giuridica. Florence: Barbèra.

Blachèr, P. 2001. Contrôle de constitutionalité et volonté générale. Paris: Press Universitaires de France.

Bongiovanni, G. 1998. Reine Rechtslehre e dottrina giuridica dello Stato. H. Kelsen e la costituzi- one austriaca del 1920. Milano: Giuffrè.

Borowski, Martin. 2005. Die Lehre vom Stufenbau des Rechts nach Adolf Julius Merkl. In Hans Kelsen – Staatsrechtler und Rechtsphilosoph des 20 Jahrhunderts, edited by S.L. Paulson and M. Stolleis, 122–159. Tübingen: Mohr-Siebeck.

Calamandrei, P. 1995. Questa nostra costituzione, 3–19. Milano: Bompiani. (first published 1955).

Capograssi, G. 1952. Impressioni su Kelsen tradotto. Rivista trimestrale di diritto pubblico 4: 767–810.

Cappelletti, M. 1973. Il controllo giudiziario di costituzionalità delle leggi nel diritto comparato. Milan: Giuffrè.

Cappelletti, M., and W. Cohen. 1979. Comparative Constitutional Law. Cases and Materials. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill.

Carrozza, P. 1988. Central Law and Peripheral Law. In Law Making. A Comparative Survey, edited by A. Pizzorusso, 238–274. Berlin: Springer.CrossRef

———. 2006. El “multilevel constitutionalism” y el sistema de Fuentes del derecho. Revista española de Derecho Europeo 19: 341–366.

———. 2007. Constitutionalism’s post-modern opening. In The Paradox of Constitutionalism, edited by M. Loughlin and N. Walker, 169–187. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

———. 2014. I rapporti centro – periferia: regionalismi, federalismi e autonomie. In Dritto costituzionale comparato, edited by P. Carrozza, A. Di Giovine and G. F. Ferrari, 894–951. Rome- Bari: Laterza.

Cassese, S. 1971. Cultura e politica del diritto amministrativo. Bologna: Il Mulino.

Castignone, S. 2008. “Il grande mistero di Hans Kelsen”. Validità ed efficacia nel formalismo kelseniano e nel realismo scandinavo. Materiali per una storia della cultura giuridica 2: 347–356.

Coutu, M. 2012. With Hugo Sinzheimer and Max Weber in Mind: The Current Crisis and the Future of Labour Law. Comparative Labour Law and Policy Journal 34: 605–626.

Crisafulli, V. 1978. Lezioni di diritto costituzionale. L’ordinamento costituzionale italiano. Le fonti normative. La Corte costituzionale. Padua: Cedam.

Cruz Villalon, P. 1987. La formaciòn del sistema Europeo de control de constitucionalidad (1918–1939). Madrid: Centro de Estudios Constitucionales.

Dahl, R., 1989. Democracy and its Critics. Italian transl. (1990) La democrazia e i suoi critici. Rome: Editori Riuniti.

David, R. 1973. I grandi sistemi giuridici contemporanei. Padua: Cedam.

De Otto, I. 1988. Derecho constitucional. Sistema de Fuentes. Barcelona: Ariel.

Dobner, P., and M. Loughlin, eds. 2010. The Twilight of Constitutionalism? Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Dogliani, M. 1982. Interpretazioni della Costituzione. Milan: Angeli.

Duverger, M. 1951. Les partis politiques. Paris: A. Colin.

Eisenmann, C. 1986. La justice constitutionelle et la Haute Cour Constitutionelle d’Autriche. Paris: Economica.

Falzea, A. 2008. Introduzione alle scienze giuridiche: il concetto del diritto. Milan: Giuffrè.

Favoreu, L. 1986. Les cours constitutionnelles. Paris: PUF.

———. 1990. Le droit constitutionnel, droit de la Constitution et constitution du droit. Revue française de droit constitutionnel I: 71–99.

Friedrich, Carl J. 1937. Constitutional Government and Politics. Italian transl. (1950) Governo costituzionale e democrazia. Vicenza: Neri Pozza.

———. 1962. Federal Constitutional Theory and Emergent Proposal. In Federalism. Mature and Emergent, edited by A.W. Machmahon, 510–532. New York: Russell & Russell. (reprint of 1955 edition).

Friesenhahn, E. 1962. Die Verfassungsgerichtbarkeit in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Köln: Heymanns. It. transl. 1973: La giurisdizione costituzionale della repubblica Federale Tedesca. Milan: Giuffrè.

Garcìa de Enterrìa, E. 1981. La Constitución como norma y el Tribunal Constitucional. Madrid: Editorial Civitas.

Institut International de Droit Public. 1929. Discussion du rapport de M. Kelsen sur “La garantie jurisdictionnelle de la Constitution (la justice constitutionnelle)”. In Annuaire de l’Institut Internationale de Droit Public, 192–201.

Kelsen, Hans. 1911. Hauptprobleme der Staatsrechtslehere entwickelt aus der Lehre vom Rechtssatze. Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr.

———. 1920. Vom Wesen und Wert der Demokratie. Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr.

———. 1923. Verfassungs und Verwaltungsgerichtsbarkeit im Dienste des Bundesstates, nach der neuen österreichischen Bundersverfassung vom 1. Oktober 1920. Zeischriften für sch- weizerischen Recht. XLII, pp. 173–217. It. Transl. Le giurisdizioni costituzionale e amminis- trativa al servizio dello stato federale secondo la nuova costituzione austriaca del 1 ottobre 1920. In H. Kelsen, La giustizia costituzionale, 5–45. Milan: Giuffrè.

———. 1924. Die Lehre von den drei Gewalten oder Funktionen des Staates. Archiv für Rechts – und Wirtschaftsphilosophie 17: 374–408.

———. 1925. Das Problem des parlamentarismus. Vienna/Leipzig: Braumüller.

———. 1927. Die Bundesexekution. Ein Beitrag zur Theorie und Praxis des Bundesstaates, unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der deutschen Reichs- und der österreichischen Bundes- Verfassung. In Festgabe für Fritz Fleiner zum 60.Geburtstag, edited by Z. Giacometti and D. Schindler, 127–187. Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr.

———. 1928. La garantie jurisdictionnelle de la Constitution (la justice constitutionnelle). Revue du Droit publique et de la Science politique XXXV: 197–257.

———. 1929a. Der Drang zur Verfassungsreform. Neue Freie Presse, October 6th, 1929.

———. 1929b. Die Grundzüge der Verfasssungsreform (I). Neue Freie Presse, October 20th, 1929.

———. 1929c. Die Grundzüge der Verfasssungsreform (II). Neue Freie Presse, October 30th, 1929.

———. 1930. Der Staat als Integration. Eine Prinzipielle Auseinandersetzung. Vienna: Springer.CrossRef

———. 1931. Wer soll der Hüter der Verfassung sein? Die Justiz VI: 576–628.

———. 1933. La dottrina pura del diritto. Metodo e concetti fondamentali. Archivio Giuridico XXVI: 121–171.

———. 1934. Reine Rechtslehre. Einleitung in die rechtswissenschaftliche Problematik. Wien: Franz Deuticke Verlag.

———. 1942. Judicial review of legislation. A comparative study of the Austrian and the American Constitution. Journal of Politics 4 (2): 183–200.CrossRef

———. 1944. Peace Through Law. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press.

———. 1945. General Theory of Law and State (Cambridge: Harward Univ. Press). It. transl. (1952): Teoria generale del diritto e dello stato. Milano: Comunità.

———. 1948a. Law and Peace in international relations. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

———. 1948b. Absolutism and Relativism in Philosophy and Politics. American Political Science Review 42 (5): 906–914.CrossRef

———. 1949. The Natural-Law Doctrine before the Tribunal of Science. Western Political Quarterly 2 (4): 481–513.CrossRef

———. 1955. Foundations of Democracy. Ethics 66 (1): 1–101.CrossRef

———. 1957. What is Justice? Justice, Law, and Politics in the Mirror of Science. Collected Essays. Berkeley – Los Angeles: University of California Press.

Lambert, E. 1921. Le gouvernement des juges et la lutte contre la législation sociale aux États- Unis. L’expérience américaine du contrôle judiciaire de la constitutionnalité des lois. Paris: Librairie Général de Droit et de Jurisprudence.

Martinico, G. 2008. L’integrazione silente. La funzione interpretativa della Corte di Giustizia e il diritto costituzionale europeo. Naples: Jovene.

———. 2013. The Tangled Complexity of the UE Constitutional Process. London: Routledge.

Mezzanotte, C. 1984. Corte costituzionale e legittimazione politica. Rome: Tipografia Veneziana.

Mock, E. 1970. Rechtsphilosophie und Rechtsphilosophen an der Wiener Juristenfacultät. Ősterrreichische Zeitschrift für Őffentliches Recht 20: 373–399.

Öhlinger, T. 1983. Verfassungsgerichtsbarkeit und parlamentarische Demokratie. In Im Dienste an Staat und Recht. Festschrift für Erwin Melichar, edited by H. Schäffer, 125–148. Vienna: Manz Verlag.

———. 2003. The Genesis of the Austrian Model of Constitutional Review of Legislation. Ratio Juris 16 (2): 206–222.CrossRef

Olechowski, T. 2009. Der Beitrag Hans Kelsens zur österreichischen Bundesverfassung. In Hans Kelsen: Leben – Werk – Wirksamkeit (Schriftenreihe des Hans Kelsen-Instituts, Bd. 32), edited by R. Walter, W. Ogris, Werner and T. Olechowski, 211–230. Vienna: Manz.

Palombella, G. 2012. E’ possibile una legalità globale? Il Rule of Law e la governance del mondo. Bologna: Il Mulino.

Patrono, M. 1987. Presentazione. In Il duplice volto del Diritto. Il sistema keleseniano e altri saggi, A. Merkl, VII-LX. Giuffrè: Milan.

Paulson, S.L. 2000. On Hans Kelsen’s Role in the Formation of the Austrian Constitution and his Defense of Constitutional Review. In The Reasonable as Rational? Festschrift for Aulis Aarnio, 385–395. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.

———. 2013. How Merkl’s Stufenbaulehre Informs Kelsen’s Concept of Law. Revus 21: 29–45.

Pegoraro, L. 2015. Giustizia costituzionale comparata. Dai modelli ai sistemi. Turin: Giappichelli.

Pizzorusso, A. 1981. Sub Art. 134 Cost. In Commentario della Costituzione a cura di G. Branca e A. Pizzorusso. Garanzie costituzionali, 1–143. Bologna-Rome: Zanichelli.

———. 1982. I sistemi di giustizia costituzionale: dai modelli alla prassi. Quaderni costi- tuzionali: 521–533.

———., ed. 1988. Law in the making. A comparative survey. Berlin: Springer.

———. 1999. La costituzione ferita. Laterza: Rome- Bari.

———. 2011. Delle fonti del diritto. Commentario del Codice Civile Scialoja – Branca. Bologna – Rome: Zanichelli – Il Foro Italiano.

Rousseau, D. 1998. La justice constitutionnelle en Europe. Paris: Montchrestien.

Rubio Llorente, F. 2004. El Tribunal Constitucional. Revista española de derecho constitucional 71: 11–33.

Salzborn, S., ed. 2009. Kritische Theorie des Staates: Staat und Recht bei Franz L. Neumann. Baden-Baden: Nomos.

Scheuerman, W. 1997. Between the Norm and the Exception: The Frankfurt School and the Rule of Law. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Schmitt, C. 1929. Der Hüter der Verfassung. Archiv für öffentliches Recht 16 (March 1929): 161–237.

———. 1933. Staat, Bewegung, Volk. Die Dreigliederung der politischen Einheit. It. transl. Un giurista davanti a se stesso. Saggi e interviste a cura di Giorgio Agamben, Vicenza: Neri Pozza. 253–312.

Schmitz, G. 1981. Die Vorentwürfe Hans Kelsens für die österreichische Bundesverfassung (Schriftenreihe des Hans Kelsen-Instituts, Bd. 6), Vienna: Mainz.

———. 2003. The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Austria 1918–1920. Ratio Juris 16 (2): 240–265.CrossRef

Schumpeter, J.A. 1942. Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. London: Allen & Unwin.

Smend, R. 1928. Verfassung und Verfassungsrecht. Munich: Duncker & Humblot.

Spadaro, A. 1994. Contributo per una teoria della costituzione. I. Tra democrazia relativista e assolutismo etico. Milan: Giuffrè.

Starck, C., A. Weber, and O. Luchterhandt, eds. 2007. Verfassungsgerichtsbarkeit in Mittel- und Osteuropa. Baden Baden: Nomos.

Stein, E. 1991. Un nuovo diritto per l’Europa. Uno sguardo d’oltre oceano. Milan: Giuffrè.

———. 2000. Thoughts from a Bridge: A Retrospective of Writings on New Europe and American Federalism. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRef

Stolleis, M. 2003. Judicial Review, Administrative Review, and Constitutional Review in the Weimar Republic. Ratio Juris 16 (2): 266–280.CrossRef

Todorov, T. 1994. La conquista dell’America. Il problema dell’altro. Turin: Einaudi.

Treves, R. 1967. Prefazione. In Lineamenti di dottrina pura del diritto, edited by Hans Kelsen, 11–21. Turin: Einaudi.

Tribe, L.H. 1978. American Constitutional Law. Mineola: The Foundation Press.

Troper, M. 1980. La separation des pouvoirs et l’histoire constitutionnelle. Paris: Librairie Général de Droit et de Jurisprudence.

———. 1995. Kelsen et le contrôle de constitutionalité. In Le Droit et Le Politique: Autour de Max Weber, Hans Kelsen, Carl Schmitt, edited by C.-M. Herrera, 157–182. Paris: Harmattan.

van Ooyen, R. 2014. Rechts- und Verfassungspolitologie bei Ernst Fraenkel und Otto Kirchheimer. Kritik und Rezeption des Rechtspositivismus von Hans Kelsen und der politischen “Freund- Feind-Theologie” von Carl Schmitt. Tyska: Verlag F. Verwaltungswisse.

Vardaro, G. 1982. Otto Kahn-Freund e l’emigrazione dei giuslavoristi weimariani. Politica del diritto 1982: 77–100.

Viola, F. 1990. La teoria della separazione tra diritto e morale. In Studi in memoria di Giovanni Tarello, vol. II, 667–705. Milan: Giuffè.

Weiler, J.H.H. 1985. Il sistema comunitario europeo. Bologna: Il Mulino.

Zagrebelsky, G. 1977. La giustizia costituzionale. Bologna: Il Mulino.

———. 1992. Il diritto mite. Legge, diritti, giustizia. Turin: Einaudi.

Zweigert, K., and H. Kötz. 1998. Introduzione al Diritto comparato. Milan: Giuffrè.

Titel: Kelsen and Contemporary Constitutionalism: The Continued Presence of Kelsenian Themes
verfasst von: Paolo Carrozza
Verlag: Springer International Publishing
Buch: Kelsenian Legal Science and the Nature of Law
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-51816-9

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-319-51817-6

Copyright-Jahr: 2017
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51817-6_5

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Premium Partner