首页> 外文学位 >Interpreting international human rights: A test case for law-as-integrity.
【24h】

Interpreting international human rights: A test case for law-as-integrity.

机译:解释国际人权:诚信法则的测试案例。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

The dissertation advocates a "constructive" conception of legal interpretation as a way of making sense of judicial recognition of the emerging international law of human rights. A centerpiece of the study consists of cases in which United States courts recognize human rights such as freedom from torture and genocide as universalizable norms backed by a consensus of the world community. Emphasis is given to analyzing competing interpretations of jurisdiction, international custom, signatory intent, and the concept of universality in connection with the application of generalizable provisions from treaties, conventions, and declarations.; Today the dominant paradigms for rights interpretation are positivism, realism, and law-as-integrity. Positivism recognizes as valid only those rights which are identifiable as a matter of plain fact based on actual conventions and practices of a determinate community. As such positivism presupposes a "scientific" conception of human rights interpretation. Realism views rights as useful social/political fictions at best. Thus, realism finds judicial interpretations of rights to be ultimately subjective or arbitrary. This amounts to a "creative" or "rhetorical" conception of human rights interpretation. Law-as-integrity mediates these extreme positions by identifying interpretations of legal rights with normative theories which seek to take rights seriously through constructing the best possible justifications for settled law. A principle advantage of law-as-integrity over positivism and realism is that it enables disputes surrounding the legality of human rights at general as well as specific levels to remain cogent and fertile. From the perspective of law-as-integrity disagreement about interpretations and applications of human rights centers around competing interpretive claims of justifying theories instead of as exaggerated ideological opposition between "skeptical" and "optimistic" philosophies of international law.; Ultimately the dissertation demonstrates how abstracting and universalizing central tenets of law-as-integrity's conception of rights interpretation from its domestic origins to international contexts yields a cogent philosophical basis for human rights adjudication.
机译:论文提倡一种“建设性”的法律解释概念,作为一种对新兴的国际人权法进行司法承认的方式。该研究的核心内容是美国法院承认人权,例如免于酷刑和种族灭绝等人权,是国际社会达成共识的普遍性准则。着重分析与适用条约,公约和宣言中的可概括性条款有关的对管辖权,国际习惯,签字意图和普遍性概念的相互解释。如今,权利解释的主要范例是实证主义,现实主义和法治诚信。实证主义只将基于确定的社区的实际惯例和惯例可根据事实确定的权利视为有效。正因为如此,实证主义预设了人权解释的“科学”概念。现实主义充其量将权利视为有用的社会/政治小说。因此,现实主义发现对权利的司法解释最终是主观的或任意的。这相当于人权解释的“创造性”或“修辞性”概念。诚信法通过使用规范性理论来识别合法权利的解释,从而调解了这些极端立场,这些规范性理论试图通过为已解决的法律构建最佳的正当理由来认真对待权利。与以实证为基础的法律相比,以实证主义和现实主义为主要原则的优势在于,它可以使围绕人权合法性的争端在总体上和在具体层次上都保持有力和富饶。从法治为一体的观点来看,关于人权的解释和适用的分歧集中在为理论辩护的相互竞争的解释性主张上,而不是国际法“怀疑的”和“乐观的”哲学之间的夸大的意识形态反对。最终,本文论证了如何抽象和普及法治正直的权利解释概念的核心原则,从其国内起源到国际背景,为人权审判提供坚实的哲学基础。

著录项

  • 作者

    Jackson, Kevin Thomas.;

  • 作者单位

    University of Maryland, College Park.;

  • 授予单位 University of Maryland, College Park.;
  • 学科 Law.; Philosophy.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 1990
  • 页码 239 p.
  • 总页数 239
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 法律;哲学理论;
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号