Human Rights and Positive Obligations to Healthcare

Maria-Artemis Kolliniati

doi:10.5771/9783845299853

Zusammenfassung

Dieses Buch richtet sich an Wissenschaftler, die zur Europäischen Menschenrechtskonvention forschen, und an jene, die an Rechtsphilosophie interessiert sind. Es richtet sich auch an Richter und Anwälte, die mit der EMRK und insbesondere der Rechtsprechung zum Schutz der Gesundheit befasst sind. Studierenden bietet das Buch die Möglichkeit, ihre rechtsphilosophischen Kenntnisse der Menschenrechte und der EMRK zu vertiefen.

Das Buch verfolgt drei Ziele: Erstens soll Joseph Raz´ „Doppeldimension der Menschenrechte“ als Theorie eines mittleren Wegs erörtert werden, die Richtern helfen kann, soziale Aspekte von Menschenrechten zu prüfen. Zweitens wird argumentiert, dass Joseph Raz´ Rechtsphilosophie als Ansatz der „Doppeldimension der Menschenrechte“ und nicht als Interessentheorie verstanden werden sollte. Drittens soll dieses Buch sich nicht nur mit Menschenrechtstheorie befassen, sondern untersuchen, wie die Rechte der EMRK in der Rechtsprechung angewandt und interpretiert werden.

Schlagworte

Publikation durchsuchen

Bibliographische Angaben

Copyrightjahr: 2019
ISBN-Print: 978-3-8487-5852-4
ISBN-Online: 978-3-8452-9985-3
Verlag: Nomos, Baden-Baden
Reihe: Nomos Universitätsschriften - Politik
Band: 196
Sprache: Englisch
Seiten: 267
Produkttyp: Monographie

Inhaltsverzeichnis

KapitelSeiten

Titelei/Inhaltsverzeichnis Kein Zugriff Seiten 1 - 14
1. 1.1 Summary of the main arguments Kein Zugriff
2. 1.2 Structure Kein Zugriff
3. 1.3 Scope Kein Zugriff
4. 1.4 Methodology Kein Zugriff
5. 1. 1.5.1 State of the art in international law and in political science Kein Zugriff
  2. 1.5.2 State of the art and positive obligations to health care Kein Zugriff
6. 1.6 Why Joseph Raz’s theory of rights? Kein Zugriff
1. 1. 2.1.1 Legal formalism Kein Zugriff
  2. 2.1.2 American legal realism Kein Zugriff
2. 1. 2.2.1 Natural law theory Kein Zugriff
  2. 1. Jeremy Bentham and the ruling theory of law Kein Zugriff
    2. H.L.A. Hart and open-textured language of the law Kein Zugriff
    3. The hermeneutic approach Kein Zugriff
    4. Non-positivism: Ronald Dworkin and law as a practice of interpretation Kein Zugriff
3. 1. 2.3.1 Natural theories of rights Kein Zugriff
  2. 2.3.2 Ronald Dworkin’s natural theory of rights Kein Zugriff
  3. 2.3.3 Deontological, rights-based theories and consequentialist accounts of human rights Kein Zugriff
  4. 2.3.4 Contingent/constructed/relative rights and objective rights Kein Zugriff
  5. 2.3.5 Charles Taylor’s communitarian account of human rights Kein Zugriff
1. 1. 3.1.1 Taking the formal characteristics of the Convention seriously Kein Zugriff
  2. 3.1.2 Positive obligations and ECtHR case law Kein Zugriff
2. 3.2 Theoretical disputes Kein Zugriff
3. 3.3 The two-stage analysis of human rights: a bifurcated approach Kein Zugriff
1. 4.1 Joseph Raz and legal positivism Kein Zugriff
2. 4.2 The notion of human rights in Joseph Raz’s approach Kein Zugriff
3. 1. 1. Values and rights Kein Zugriff
    2. Overreaching and traditional theories Kein Zugriff
    3. “Universality” as the enemy of human rights Kein Zugriff
  2. 4.3.2 Anti-universality: Political conception, social relativism and anti-moral relativism Kein Zugriff
4. 4.4 The “why-dimension” of rights Kein Zugriff
5. 4.5 Rights and interests Kein Zugriff
6. 1. 4.6.1 Contingent goods, inherent public goods or collective goods Kein Zugriff
  2. 4.6.2 The common good: Finnis’s approach and its relationship with Razian collective goods Kein Zugriff
  3. 4.6.3 Practical reason for Finnis and Raz Kein Zugriff
  4. 4.6.4 Common good, solidarity and utilitarianism Kein Zugriff
  5. 4.6.5 Traditional liberal rights and the common good Kein Zugriff
7. 1. 4.7.1 The criticism of liberalism by communitarians Kein Zugriff
  2. 4.7.2 Rights: Autonomy, options and collective goods Kein Zugriff
8. 1. 4.8.1 Rights and duties Kein Zugriff
  2. 4.8.2 Creating new duties: the dynamic aspect of rights Kein Zugriff
9. 1. 4.9.1 Raz’s rights and Taylor’s communitarian rights Kein Zugriff
1. 5.1 Introduction Kein Zugriff
2. 5.2 Expulsion, detention and healthcare: Positive obligations and Article 3 of the ECHR (an overview) Kein Zugriff
3. 5.3 Article 3 of the ECHR: its general characteristics and its relationship to healthcare Kein Zugriff
4. 1. 5.4.1 Expulsion and intentional acts or omissions Kein Zugriff
  2. 5.4.2 Expulsion and “minimum level of severity” Kein Zugriff
  3. 5.4.3 Expulsion and the “threefold condition for exceptional circumstances/humanitarian reasons” Kein Zugriff
  4. 5.4.4 Expulsion, Article 3 of the ECHR and implied restrictions Kein Zugriff
  5. 5.4.5 Expulsion and the social aspects of the ECHR Kein Zugriff
5. 1. 5.5.1 Detention, Article 3 and the “minimum level of severity” Kein Zugriff
  2. 5.5.2 Detention and “intentional acts or omissions” Kein Zugriff
6. 5.6 Overview of the ECtHR case law relating to Article 3 of the ECHR Kein Zugriff
7. 5.7 General characteristics of Article 8 of the ECHR and its relationship with healthcare and positive obligations Kein Zugriff
8. 5.8 Interference by public authorities and Article 8 of the ECHR Kein Zugriff
9. 5.9 Article 8 of the ECHR and the minimum threshold of severity Kein Zugriff
10. 1. 5.10.1 Medical care treatment Kein Zugriff
  2. 5.10.2 Expulsion Kein Zugriff
  3. 5.10.3 Environmental protection Kein Zugriff
11. 5.11 Overview of the ECtHR case law relating to Article 8 of the ECHR Kein Zugriff
1. 6.1 Introduction Kein Zugriff
2. 1. 6.2.1 The absence of healthcare and inhuman treatment Kein Zugriff
  2. 6.2.2 Positive obligation to healthcare, physical well-being and Razian autonomy-based freedom Kein Zugriff
  3. 6.2.3 Right-holders: Physically present and members of the same moral community Kein Zugriff
  4. 6.2.4 Balancing interests and financial restrictions Kein Zugriff
  5. 6.2.5 Democracy as a collective good Kein Zugriff
  6. 6.2.6 “Human rights inflation”? Kein Zugriff
3. 6.3 Overview of chapter six Kein Zugriff
1. 7.1 Raz’s theory of rights: A synopsis Kein Zugriff
2. 7.2 Critique of Joseph Raz’s account of rights and “research desiderata” for further research Kein Zugriff
3. 7.3 Findings of the study and concluding remarks Kein Zugriff
Bibliography Kein Zugriff Seiten 255 - 264
European Court of Human Rights (and former European Commission of Human Rights) Case Law Kein Zugriff Seiten 265 - 267

Literaturverzeichnis (180 Einträge)

Agamben, Giorgio. Homo sacer: Κυρίαρχη εξουσία και γυμνή ζωή. (μτφρ. Παναγιώτης Τσιαμούρας). Αθήνα: Scripta, 2005. Google Scholar öffnen
Akandji-Kombe, Jean-François. “Positive obligations under the European Convention: A guide to the implementation of the European Convention on Human Rights.” Human rights handbooks, no. 7, Strasbourg: Council of Europe, 2007. Google Scholar öffnen
Alexy, Robert. A theory of Constitutional Rights, trans. Julian Rivers. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002. Google Scholar öffnen
Alexy, Robert. A theory of Constitutional Rights “On the concept and the nature of law.” Ratio Juris 21, no.3 (2008): 281-299. Google Scholar öffnen
Αριστοτέλης [Aristotle]. Ηθικά Νικομάχεια [Nicomachean Ethics]. (μτφρ. Φιλολογική ομάδα Κάκτου). Αθήνα: Κάκτος, 1993. Google Scholar öffnen
Atria, Fernando. “Social Rights, Social Contract, Socialism.” Social & Legal Studies 24, no. 4 (2015): 598–613. Google Scholar öffnen
Bader, Ralf M. Robert Nozick. Major conservative and libertarian thinkers v. 11. New York: Continuum, 2010. Google Scholar öffnen
Batnitzky, Leora. “A Seamless Web? John Finnis and Joseph Raz on Practical Reason and the Obligation to Obey the Law.” Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 15, no. 2 (1995): 153-175. Google Scholar öffnen
Belliotti, Raymohnd A. Justifying Law: The Debate over Foundations, Goals, and Methods. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1992. Google Scholar öffnen
Bentham, Jeremy. “Anarchical Fallacies; being an examination of the Declaration of Rights issued during the French Revolution.” In Nonsense upon stilts: Bentham, Burke and Marx on the Rights of Man. Edited by Jeremy Waldron, 46-76. London and New York: Methuen, 1987. Google Scholar öffnen
Bentham, Jeremy. “Anarchical Fallacies; being an examination of the Declaration of Rights issued during the French Revolution.” In Nonsense upon stilts: Bentham An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. [first ed. 1781]. Kitchener: Batoche Books, 2000. Google Scholar öffnen
Berlin, Isaiah. Four essays on Liberty. New York: Oxford University Press, 1969. Google Scholar öffnen
Bix, Brian. “On the dividing line between natural law theory and legal positivism.” Notre Dame Law Review 75, no. 5 (1999): 1613–1624. Google Scholar öffnen
Bix, Brian. “On the dividing line between natural law theory and legal positivism.” Notre Dame Law Review 75 “Natural Law: The Modern Tradition.” In The Oxford handbook of jurisprudence and philosophy of law. Edited by Jules L. Coleman, Scott Shapiro and Kenneth E. Himma, 64–66. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press, 2004. Google Scholar öffnen
Brems, Eva. “Human Rights: Minimum and Maximum Perspectives,” Human Rights Law Review 9(3) (2009): 349-372. Google Scholar öffnen
Brownlee, Kimberley. “A Human Right against social deprivation.” The Philosophical Quarterly 63, no. 251 (2013): 199-222. Google Scholar öffnen
Bryson, Phillip J. Socialism: Origins, Expansion, Decline, and the Attempted Revival in the United States. Bloomington, Indiana: Xlibris, 2015. Google Scholar öffnen
Carens, Joseph H. “Rights and Duties in an Egalitarian Society.” Political Theory 14 (1986): 31-49. Google Scholar öffnen
Christodoulidis, Emilios. “Social Rights and Markets.” Social & Legal Studies 24, no. 4 (2015): 595–597. Google Scholar öffnen
Coleman, Jules L. “Beyond Inclusive Legal Positivism.” Ratio Juris 22, no. 3 (2009): 359–394. Google Scholar öffnen
Colm O´Cinneide. “The triumph of Human Rights: dream or nightmare?” UCL lectures, 2012. Online access: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/lhl/Spring2012/04_26012012 (last accessed: May 17, 2017). Google Scholar öffnen
Conant, Lisa. “Individuals, Courts, and the Development of European Social Rights.” Comparative Political Studies 39 (2006): 76-100. Google Scholar öffnen
Connell, Andrew. “Civil Rights and Social Welfare: Some Thoughts on the Contemporary Relevance of T. H. Marshall.” The Political Quarterly 83, no. 3 (2012): 551–559. Google Scholar öffnen
Council of Europe, European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as amended by Protocols Nos. 11 and 14, supplemented by Protocols Nos. 1, 4, 6, 7, 12 and 13, 4 November 1950. Google Scholar öffnen
Council of Europe, European Social Charter (Revised), 3 May 1996, ETS 163. Google Scholar öffnen
Council of Europe. “Manual on Human Rights and the Environment.” 2nd ed. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing, 2012. Google Scholar öffnen
Council of Europe. “Practical Guide on Admissibility Criteria.” Strasbourg: Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights, 2014. Google Scholar öffnen
Cruft, Rowan. “Rights: Beyond Interest Theory and Will Theory?” Law and Philosophy 23, no. 4 (2004): 347–397. Google Scholar öffnen
Curran, Eleanor. “Hobbes’s Theory of Rights – A Modern Interest Theory.” The Journal of Ethics 6, no. 1 (2002): 63–86. Google Scholar öffnen
Daniels, Norman. “Democratic Equality: Rawls’s Complex Egalitarianism.” In The Cambridge companion to Rawls. Edited by Samuel Freeman, 241–276. Cambridge companions to philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008. Google Scholar öffnen
Donnelly, Jack. “The Relative Universality of Human Rights.” Human Rights Quarterly 29, no. 2 (2007): 281–306. Google Scholar öffnen
Donnelly, Jack. “The Relative Universality of Human Rights.” Human Rights Quarterly 29 Universal Human Rights in Theory and Practice. 3rd ed. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 2013. Google Scholar öffnen
Dworkin, Ronald. “The Model of Rules.” The University of Chicago Law Review 35, no. 14 (1967): 14-46. Google Scholar öffnen
Dworkin, Ronald. “The Model of Rules.” The University of Chicago Law Review 35 Taking Rights Seriously. 2nd ed. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1978. Google Scholar öffnen
Dworkin, Ronald. “The Model of Rules.” The University of Chicago Law Review 35 “What Is Equality? Part 1: Equality of Welfare.” Philosophy & Public Affairs 10, no. 3 (1981): 185–246. Google Scholar öffnen
Dworkin, Ronald. “The Model of Rules.” The University of Chicago Law Review 35 “Law as interpretation.” Texas Law Review 60 (1982): 527-550. Google Scholar öffnen
Dworkin, Ronald. “The Model of Rules.” The University of Chicago Law Review 35 “Rights as trumps.” In Theories of Rights. Edited by Jeremy Waldron. 1rst ed. 153-167. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1984. Google Scholar öffnen
Dworkin, Ronald. “The Model of Rules.” The University of Chicago Law Review 35 Law´s Empire. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The Belknap press of Harvard University Press, 1986. Google Scholar öffnen
Dworkin, Ronald. “The Model of Rules.” The University of Chicago Law Review 35 Justice for Hedgehogs. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The Belknap press of Harvard University Press, 2011. Google Scholar öffnen
Eskridge Jr., William N. “The New Textualism.” UCLA Law Review 37, no. 621 (1990): 621-691. Google Scholar öffnen
European Court of Human Rights, “Research Report on health-related issues in the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights.” Council of Europe, June 2015. Google Scholar öffnen
European Union, Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, 26 October 2012, 2012/C 326/02. [Published in the Official Journal of the European Communities, 18 December 2000 (2000/C 364/01)]. Google Scholar öffnen
Finnis, John. Natural Law and Natural Rights. 5th ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 1988. Google Scholar öffnen
Fredman, Sandra. Human Rights Transformed: Positive Rights and Positive Duties. 1rst ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008. Google Scholar öffnen
Freeman, Michael. “The Philosophical Foundations of Human Rights.” Human Rights Quarterly 16 (1994): 491-514. Google Scholar öffnen
Freeman, Michael. “The Philosophical Foundations of Human Rights.” Human Rights Quarterly 16 (1994) Human Rights: An interdisciplinary approach, Cambridge: Polity Press, 2004. Google Scholar öffnen
Gadamer, Hans-Georg. Truth and method. translation revised by: Marshall, Donald G; Weinsheimer, Joel. Continuum impacts 2nd, rev. ed. London, New York: Continuum, 2004. Google Scholar öffnen
George, Robert P., Lloyd L. Weinreb, and Russell Hittinger. “Recent Criticism of Natural Law Theory.” The University of Chicago Law Review 55, no. 4 (1988): 1371-1429. Google Scholar öffnen
George, Robert P. “The Unorthodox Liberalism of Joseph Raz.” The Review of Politics 53, no. 4 (1991): 652–671. Google Scholar öffnen
Gerards, Janneke. “The European Court of Human Rights.” In Comparative Constitutional Reasoning. Edited by András Jakab, 237–276. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017. Google Scholar öffnen
Green, Michael Steven. “Legal realism as theory of law.” William & Mary Law Review 46, no. 6 (2004): 1915–2000. Google Scholar öffnen
Green, Leslie. “Three Themes from Raz.” Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 25, no. 3 (2005): 503–523. Google Scholar öffnen
Green, Leslie, and Brian Leiter. Oxford studies in philosophy of law. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013. Google Scholar öffnen
Greer, Steven C. The exceptions to Articles 8 to 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Human rights files 15. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing, 1997. Google Scholar öffnen
Greer, Steven C. The exceptions to Articles 8 to 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Human rights files 15. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing “"Balancing" and the European Court of Human Rights: A Contribution to the Habermas-Alexy Debate.” Cambridge Law Journal 63, no. 2 (1999): 412–434. Google Scholar öffnen
Greer, Steven C. The exceptions to Articles 8 to 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Human rights files 15. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing The European Convention on Human Rights: Achievements, problems and prospects. Cambridge studies in European law and policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006. Google Scholar öffnen
Grotius, Hugo. The Rights of War and Peace, including the Law of Nature and of Nations: translated from the Original Latin of Grotius, with Notes and Illustrations from Political and Legal Writers, by A.C. Campbell, A.M. with an Introduction by David J. Hill. New York: M. Walter Dunne, 1901 ed. [1625]. Available online: http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/grotius-the-rights-of-war-and-peace-1901-ed (last update 12-10-2015). Google Scholar öffnen
Hare, Richard M. Freedom and reason. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1963. Google Scholar öffnen
Harris, David John, Michael O'Boyle, Colin Warbrick, Ed Bates, and Carla Buckley. Law of the European Convention on Human Rights. With the assistance of Paul Harvey. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014. Google Scholar öffnen
Hart, Herbert L. A. “Are There Any Natural Rights?” The Philosophical Review 64, no. 2 (1955): 175–91. Google Scholar öffnen
Hart, Herbert L. A. “Are There Any Natural Rights?” The Philosophical Review 64 The Concept of Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1961. Google Scholar öffnen
Hittinger, Russell. A critique of the new natural law theory. Notre Dame, Ind: University of Notre Dame Press, 1987. Google Scholar öffnen
Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan. (ed. A. P. Martinich and Brian Battiste). Toronto: Broadview Editions, 2011. Google Scholar öffnen
Holmes, Oliver Wendell. “The Path of the Law.” Harvard Law Review 457, no. 10 (1897). Google Scholar öffnen
Horty, John F. “Rules and reasons in the theory of precedent.” Legal Theory 17 (2011): 1-33. Google Scholar öffnen
Kao, Grace Y. Grounding Human Rights in a Pluralist World. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 2011. Google Scholar öffnen
Kar, Robin B. “Hart's Response to Exclusive Legal Positivism.” Georgetown law Journal 95 (2006): 393–461. Google Scholar öffnen
Kelsen, Hans. Pure theory of law. Translation from the second German edition: Max Knight. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1967. Google Scholar öffnen
Kenny, Jo. “European Convention on Human Rights and Social Welfare.” European Human Rights Law Review, no. 5 (2010): 495–503. Google Scholar öffnen
Kilkelly, Ursula. “The right to respect for private and family life: A guide to the implementation of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.” Human rights handbooks 1, 2003. http://www.echr.coe.int/LibraryDocs/HR%20handbooks/handbook01_en.pdf. Google Scholar öffnen
Klatt, Matthias. “Positive Obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights.” Heidelberg Journal of International Law (HJIL) 71 (2011): 691–718. Google Scholar öffnen
Koch, Ida Elisabeth. “Economic, Social and Cultural Rights as Components in Civil and Political Rights: A Hermeneutic Perspective.” The International Journal of Human Rights 10 (2006): 405-430. Google Scholar öffnen
Korsgaard, Christine M., G. A. Cohen, Raymond Geuss, Thomas Nagel, and Bernard Williams. The Sources of Normativity. 14th Ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010. Google Scholar öffnen
Kramer, Matthew H. “Refining the Interest Theory of Rights.” The American Journal of Jurisprudence 55, no. 1 (2010): 31–39. Google Scholar öffnen
Kramer, Matthew H. “Refining the Interest Theory of Rights.” The American Journal of Jurisprudence 55 “Some Doubts about Alternatives to the Interest Theory of Rights.” Ethics 123, no. 2 (2013): 245–63. Google Scholar öffnen
Kronman, Anthony T. “Talent Pooling.” Nomos 23 (1981): 58–79. Google Scholar öffnen
Kumm, Mattias. “Political Liberalism and the Structure of Rights: On the Place and Limits of the Proportionality Requirement.” In Law, rights and discourse: The legal philosophy of Robert Alexy. Edited by George Pavlakos, 131–66. Legal Theory Today, No. 11. Oxford, Portland, Or.: Hart Publishing, 2007. Google Scholar öffnen
Kymlicka, Will. “Liberal Individualism and Liberal Neutrality.” Ethics 99, no. 4 (1989): 883–905. Google Scholar öffnen
Kymlicka, Will. “Liberal Individualism and Liberal Neutrality.” Ethics 99 Contemporary political philosophy: An introduction. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2002. Google Scholar öffnen
La Torre, Massimo. “On Two Distinct and Opposing Versions of Natural Law: "Exclusive" versus "Inclusive".” Ratio Juris 19, no. 2 (2006): 197–216. Google Scholar öffnen
Lambert, Hélène. The position of aliens in relation to the European Convention on Human Rights. 3rd ed. Migration Collection. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing, 2006. Google Scholar öffnen
Lamond, Grant. “Do precedents create rules?.” Legal Theory 11 (2005): 1-26. Google Scholar öffnen
Langlois, Anthony J. “Human Rights and Modern Liberalism: A Critique.” Political Studies 51, no. 3 (2016): 509–523. Google Scholar öffnen
Lavrysen, Laurens. “The scope of rights and the scope of obligations: Positive obligations.” In Shaping rights in the ECHR: The Role of the European Court of Human rights in Determining the scope of Human Rights. Edited by Eva Brems and Janneke Gerrards. 162-182. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014. Google Scholar öffnen
Lavrysen, Laurens. “The scope of rights and the scope of obligations: Positive obligations.” In Shaping rights in the ECHR: The Role of the European Court of Human rights in Determining the scope of Human Rights. Edited by Eva Brems and Janneke Gerrards. 162-182. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Human Rights in a positive state: Rethinking the relationship between positive and negative obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights. Doctoral thesis. University of Ghent, 2016. Google Scholar öffnen
Leijten, Ingrit. “Defining the scope of economic and social guarantees in the case law of the ECtHR.” In Shaping rights in the ECHR: The Role of the European Court of Human rights in Determining the scope of Human Rights. Edited by Eva Brems and Janneke Gerrards. 109–136. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014. Google Scholar öffnen
Leiter, Brian. “Positivism, Formalism, Realism: Reviewed Work: Legal Positivism in American Jurisprudence by Anthony Sebok.” Columbia Law Review 99, no. 4 (1999): 1138–1164. Google Scholar öffnen
Leiter, Brian. “Legal Formalism and Legal Realism: What is the Issue?” Legal Theory 16, no. 02 (2010): 111–133. Google Scholar öffnen
Letsas, George. “The Truth in Autonomous Concepts: How To Interpret the ECHR.” European Journal of International Law 15, no. 2 (2004): 279–305. Google Scholar öffnen
Letsas, George. A theory of interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007. Google Scholar öffnen
Letsas, George. “Strasbourg's Interpretive Ethic: Lessons for the International Lawyer.” European Journal of International Law 21, no. 3 (2010): 509–541. Google Scholar öffnen
Locke, John. Second Treatise of Government. (ed. C. B. Macpherson). Indianapolis, Indiana: Hackett Publishing Company, 1980. Google Scholar öffnen
Lomasky, Loren E. “But is it liberalism?” Critical Review 4, 1-2 (1990): 86–105. Google Scholar öffnen
Loughlin, Martin. Sword and scales: An examination of the relationship between law and politics. Oxford, Portland, Or.: Hart Publishing, 2000. Google Scholar öffnen
Luling Haughton, Rosemary. “Transcendence and Being Modern.” In A Catholic modernity? Charles Taylor's Marianist Award lecture, with responses by William M. Shea, Rosemary Luling Haughton, George Marsden, Jean Bethke Elshtain. Edited by Charles Taylor, and James Heft. 65-81. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999. Google Scholar öffnen
MacIntyre, Alasdair C. After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory. 3rd ed. Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 2007. Google Scholar öffnen
Mackie, John L. Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong. New York: Penguin, 1977. Google Scholar öffnen
Macklem, Patrick. The Sovereignty of Human Rights. New York: Oxford University Press, 2015. Google Scholar öffnen
Magnussen, Anne-Mette, and Even Nilssen. “Juridification and the Construction of Social Citizenship.” Journal of Law and Society 40, no. 2 (2013): 228–248. Google Scholar öffnen
Mantouvalou, Virginia. “N v UK: No Duty to Rescue the Nearby Needy?” The Modern Law Review Limited 72 (2009): 815-843. Google Scholar öffnen
Mantouvalou, Virginia. “N v UK: No Duty to Rescue the Nearby Needy?” The Modern Law Review Limited 72 (2009) “Labour Rights in the European Convention on Human Rights: An Intellectual Justification for an Integrated Approach to Interpretation.” Human Rights Law Review 13:3 (2013): 529-555. Google Scholar öffnen
McCabe, David. “Joseph Raz and the Contextual Argument for Liberal Perfectionism.” Ethics 111, no. 3 (2001): 493–522. Google Scholar öffnen
Mccrudden, Christopher. “Legal Research and the Social Sciences.” Law Quarterly Review 122 (2006): 632-650. Google Scholar öffnen
Mill, John Stuart. Utilitarianism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014. Google Scholar öffnen
Moore, Margaret. “Liberalism and the Ideal of the Good Life.” The Review of Politics 53, no. 4 (1991): 672–690. Google Scholar öffnen
Morawetz, Thomas. “The Authority of Law. Joseph Raz.” Ethics 91, no. 3 (1981): 516–519. Google Scholar öffnen
Moskop, J. C. “Rawlsian justice and a human right to health care.” The Journal of medicine and philosophy 8, no. 4 (1983): 329–338. Google Scholar öffnen
Mowbray, Alistair R. The development of positive obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights by the European Court of Human Rights. Human rights law in perspective v. 2. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2004. Google Scholar öffnen
Nathan, Andrew J. “Universalism: A Particularistic Account.” In Negotiating culture and human rights. Edited by Lynda S. Bell, Andrew J. Nathan and Ilan Peleg, 349–68. New York: Columbia University Press, 2001. Google Scholar öffnen
Nickel, James W. “Poverty and Rights.” Philosophical Quarterly 55, no. 220 (2005): 385–402. Google Scholar öffnen
Norman, Wayne J. “The Autonomy-Based Liberalism of Joseph Raz.” Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence 2, no. 2 (1989): 151–162. Google Scholar öffnen
Nozick, Robert. Anarchy, State, and Utopia. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1999. Google Scholar öffnen
Nussbaum, Martha, and Sen, Amartya. The Quality of Life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press 1993. The online version available at: http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/0198287976.001.0001/acprof-9780198287971. Google Scholar öffnen
Olson, Mancur. The Logic of collective action: Public goods and the theory of groups. 2nd edition. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1971. Google Scholar öffnen
Osiatyński, Wiktor. Human rights and their limits. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009. Google Scholar öffnen
Ostrom, Elinor. Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990. Google Scholar öffnen
Paul, Ellen Frankel, Fred D. Miller, and Jeffrey Paul, eds. Natural rights liberalism from Locke to Nozick. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005. Google Scholar öffnen
Pavlakos, George. “Non-Individualism, Rights, and Practical Reason.” Ratio Juris 21, no. 1 (2008): 66–93. Google Scholar öffnen
Pavlakos, George, Niko Kolodny, Ulrike Heuer, and Douglas Lavin. “Three comments on Joseph Raz’s Conception on Normativity.” Jurisprudence 2, no. 2 (2011): 329-378. Google Scholar öffnen
Pettit, Philip. A theory of freedom: From the psychology to the politics of agency. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001. Google Scholar öffnen
Πολίτης, Γιώργος Ν. (2010). Ελευθερία και Εξουσία: Καταστατικές αρχές κοινωνικής φιλοσοφίας. Αθήνα: Γιώργος Ν. Πολίτης. Google Scholar öffnen
Posner, Richard A. “Legal formalism, legal realism, and the interpretation of statutes and the constitution.” Case Western Reserve Law Review 37, no. 2 (1986): 179–217. Google Scholar öffnen
Pound, Roscoe. “Mechanical Jurisprudence.” Columbia Law Review 8, no. 8 (1908): 605. Google Scholar öffnen
Rawls, John. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1999. Google Scholar öffnen
Rawls, John. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge The Law of Peoples. 2nd ed. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 2000. Google Scholar öffnen
Raz, Joseph. “Legal Principles and the Limits of Law.” The Yale Law Journal 81, no. 5 (1972): 823-854. Google Scholar öffnen
Raz, Joseph. “Legal Principles and the Limits of Law.” The Yale Law Journal 81 The Authority of Law: Essays on Law and Morality. New York: Oxford University Press, 1979. Google Scholar öffnen
Raz, Joseph. “Legal Principles and the Limits of Law.” The Yale Law Journal 81 “Professor Dworkin´s theory of rights.” Review of Taking Rights Seriously, by Ronald Dworkin. Political Studies XXVI, no. 1 (1983): 123-137. Google Scholar öffnen
Raz, Joseph. “Legal Principles and the Limits of Law.” The Yale Law Journal 81 “On the Nature of Rights.” Mind 93, no. 370 (1984): 194-214. Google Scholar öffnen
Raz, Joseph. “Legal Principles and the Limits of Law.” The Yale Law Journal 81 The Morality of Freedom. New York: Oxford University Press, 1988. Google Scholar öffnen
Raz, Joseph. “Legal Principles and the Limits of Law.” The Yale Law Journal 81 “Liberating duties.” Law and Philosophy 8, no. 1 (1989): 3-21. Google Scholar öffnen
Raz, Joseph. “Legal Principles and the Limits of Law.” The Yale Law Journal 81 “Morality as Interpretation.” Review of Interpretation and Social Criticism, by Michael Walzer. Ethics 101, no. 2 (1991): 392-405. Google Scholar öffnen
Raz, Joseph. “Legal Principles and the Limits of Law.” The Yale Law Journal 81 “Rights and Individual Well-being.” Ratio Juris 5, no. 2 (1992): 127-142. Google Scholar öffnen
Raz, Joseph. “Legal Principles and the Limits of Law.” The Yale Law Journal 81 “On the Autonomy of Legal Reasoning.” Ratio Juris 6, no. 1 (1993): 1-15. Google Scholar öffnen
Raz, Joseph. “Legal Principles and the Limits of Law.” The Yale Law Journal 81 26 March 1993, in the second out of four lectures titled ´The Practice of Value´ at Princeton University. Google Scholar öffnen
Raz, Joseph. “Legal Principles and the Limits of Law.” The Yale Law Journal 81 “Rights and Politics.” Indiana Law Journal 71, no. 27 (1995): 27-44. Google Scholar öffnen
Raz, Joseph. “Legal Principles and the Limits of Law.” The Yale Law Journal 81 Ethics in the public domain: Essays in the Morality of Law and Politics. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996. Google Scholar öffnen
Raz, Joseph. “Legal Principles and the Limits of Law.” The Yale Law Journal 81 Practical Reason and Norms. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999. Google Scholar öffnen
Raz, Joseph. “Legal Principles and the Limits of Law.” The Yale Law Journal 81 “The Myth of Instrumental Rationality.” Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy 1, no. 1 (2005): 2-28. Google Scholar öffnen
Raz, Joseph. “Legal Principles and the Limits of Law.” The Yale Law Journal 81 “Human Rights Without Foundations.” Legal Studies Research Paper Series, no. 14/2007, University of Oxford Faculty of Law, 2007. Google Scholar öffnen
Raz, Joseph. “Legal Principles and the Limits of Law.” The Yale Law Journal 81 “Being in the world.” Ratio 23, no. 4 (2010): 433-452. Google Scholar öffnen
Raz, Joseph. “Legal Principles and the Limits of Law.” The Yale Law Journal 81 “Human Rights in the Emerging World Order.” Transnational Legal Theory 1, no. 1 (2010): 31-47. Google Scholar öffnen
Raz, Joseph. “Legal Principles and the Limits of Law.” The Yale Law Journal 81 “Is there a reason to keep a promise?” Legal Studies Research Paper Series, no. 2014-5, King’s College London Dickson Poon School of Law, 2012. Google Scholar öffnen
Raz, Joseph. “Legal Principles and the Limits of Law.” The Yale Law Journal 81 Email correspondence with author. February 9, 2017. Google Scholar öffnen
Raz, Joseph. “Legal Principles and the Limits of Law.” The Yale Law Journal 81 Email correspondence with author. February 14, 2017. Google Scholar öffnen
Reidy, Aisling. “The prohibition of torture: A guide to the implementation of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights.” Human rights handbooks, no. 6, Strasbourg: Council of Europe, 2003. Google Scholar öffnen
Ruger, Jennifer Prah. “Toward a Theory of a Right to Health: Capability and Incompletely Theorized Agreements.” Yale Journal of Law & the Humanities 18 (2006): 273-326. Google Scholar öffnen
Sandel, Michael J., ed. Liberalism and its critics. Readings in social and political theory. New York: New York University Press, 1984. Google Scholar öffnen
Sandel, Michael J. Liberalism and the limits of justice. 2nd edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. Google Scholar öffnen
Sathanapally, Aruna. “Justifying procedural rights review.” paper presentation at the Expert seminar on procedural review and the European Court of Human Rights, Ghent, 21-22 May 2015. Google Scholar öffnen
Scanlon, Thomas M. “Rights and Interests.” In Arguments for a better world: Essays in honor of Amartya Sen. Edited by Kaushik Basu and Amartya Sen, 68–79. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009. Google Scholar öffnen
Sebok, Anthony James. Legal positivism in American jurisprudence. Cambridge studies in philosophy and law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. Google Scholar öffnen
Sen, Amartya. Inequality Reexamined. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1992. Google Scholar öffnen
Sen, Amartya. Inequality Reexamined. Cambridge: Harvard University Press Development as Freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999. Google Scholar öffnen
Shapiro, Danny. “Does Ronald Dworkin Take Rights Seriously?” Canadian Journal of Philosophy 12, no. 3 (2013): 417–434. Google Scholar öffnen
Shea, William M. “A Vote of Thanks to Voltaire.” In A Catholic modernity? Charles Taylor's Marianist Award lecture, with responses by William M. Shea, Rosemary Luling Haughton, George Marsden, Jean Bethke Elshtain. Edited by Charles Taylor and James Heft, 39–64. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999. Google Scholar öffnen
Shelton, Dina (ed.). The Oxford handbook of International Human Rights Law, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013. Google Scholar öffnen
Shue, Henry. Basic Rights: Subsistence, Affluence, and U.S. Foreign Policy. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1980. Google Scholar öffnen
Simmonds, Nigel E. Central issues in jurisprudence: Justice, law and rights. 3rd ed. London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2008. Google Scholar öffnen
Simpson, A. W. Brian. “The Ratio Decidendi of a Case and the Doctrine of Binding Precedent.” In Oxford Essays in Jurisprudence 1st series. Edited by A. G. Guest, 148–175. London: Oxford University Press, 1961. Google Scholar öffnen
Skinner, Quentin. “The idea of negative liberty: Philosophical and historical perspectives.” In Philosophy in History: Essays in the Historiography of Philosophy. Edited by Richard Rorty, Jerome Schneewind, and Quentin Skinner. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984. Google Scholar öffnen
Smet, Stijn. “The ‘absolute’ prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment in Article 3 ECHR.” In Shaping rights in the ECHR: The role of the European Court of Human Rights in determining the scope of human rights. Edited by Eva Brems and Janneke H. Gerards, 273–93. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014. Google Scholar öffnen
Stone Sweet, Alec. “On the Constitutionalisation of the Convention: The European Court of Human Rights as a Constitutional Court.” Faculty Scholarship Series 1-1, Yale Law School, 2009. Google Scholar öffnen
Sumner, Leonard W. The moral foundation of rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987. Google Scholar öffnen
Tamanaha, Brian Z. Beyond the Formalist-Realist Divide: The Role of Politics in Judging. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2009. Google Scholar öffnen
Tasioulas, John. “Human Rights, Legitimacy, and International Law.” The American Journal of Jurisprudence 58, no. 1 (2013): 1-25. Google Scholar öffnen
Taylor, Charles. Human Agency and Language: Philosophical Papers 1. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1985. Google Scholar öffnen
Taylor, Charles. Human Agency and Language: Philosophical Papers 1. New York: Cambridge University Press “A Catholic Modernity?” In A Catholic Modernity? Charles Taylor´s Marianist Award Lecture, with responses by William M. Shea, Rosemary Luling Haughton, George Marsden, Jean Bethke Elshtain. Edited by Charles Taylor, and James Heft, 13-37. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999. Google Scholar öffnen
Taylor, Charles. Human Agency and Language: Philosophical Papers 1. New York: Cambridge University Press Sources of the Self: The Making of the Modern Identity. 10th ed. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 2001. Google Scholar öffnen
Taylor, Charles. Human Agency and Language: Philosophical Papers 1. New York: Cambridge University Press “Gadamer on the Human Sciences.” In The Cambridge Companion to Gadamer. Edited by Robert J. Dostal. 126-142. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002. Google Scholar öffnen
Van der Schyff, Gerhard. Limitation of Rights: As study of the European Convention and the South African Bill of Rights. Nijmegen: Wolf Legal Publishers, 2005. Google Scholar öffnen
van Duffel, Siegfried. “Moral Philosophy.” In The Oxford handbook of International Human Rights Law. Edited by Dinah Shelton. 32–53. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013. Google Scholar öffnen
Van Hoecke, Mark, ed. Methodologies of Legal Research: Which kind of method for what kind of disciple? Oxford and Portland, Oregon: Hart Publishing, 2011. Google Scholar öffnen
Veitch, Scott, Emilios A. Christodoulidis, and Lindsay Farmer. Jurisprudence: Themes and concepts. 2nd ed. London: Routledge, 2012. Google Scholar öffnen
Waldron, Jeremy. Nonsense upon stilts: Bentham, Burke and Marx on the Rights of Man. London and New York: Methuen, 1987. Google Scholar öffnen
Waldron, Jeremy. Nonsense upon stilts: Bentham “A Right-Based Critique of Constitutional Rights.” Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 13, no. 1 (1993): 18-51. Google Scholar öffnen
Walzer, Michael. “The Communitarian Critique of Liberalism.” Political Theory 18, no. 1 (1990): 6-23. Google Scholar öffnen
Weinreb, Lloyd. Natural Law and Justice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1987. Google Scholar öffnen
Wellman, Carl. The moral dimensions of human rights. New York: Oxford University Press, 2010. Google Scholar öffnen
Williams, Bernard. “A critique of utilitarianism.” In Utilitarianism For and Against. Edited by J. J. C. Smart and Bernard Williams. 77-150. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1998. Google Scholar öffnen