La inconstitucionalidad del estatuto de desarrollo rural entrevista con el ex magistrado de la corte constitucional

La inconstitucionalidad del Estatuto de Desarrollo Rural Entrevista con el ex magistrado de la Corte Constituciona

Jurisprudencia Penal

Sección A) los derechos humanos en el sistema juridico español: los derechos humanos y el derecho pena

Contributions to the sociology of law : a critical reading of Marx and Weber : a thesis presented in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Sociology, Massey University

The purpose of this thesis is to aid the process of uderstanding the sociology of law - what it has been and what it can be. It is most important to consider to what extent can law and sociology contribute in the real human struggle for economic, social and political freedom. There are points of convergence and important differences between the legal and the sociological approaches to the study of law and society. Today, interdisciplinary research is increasing at different levels of law and sociology, and a new analytical perspective, a contemporary sociology of law, has emerged. In order to point out new directions within this field of enquiry, we try to grasp the differences and interstices between the approaches made by law and sociology. Both perspectives are important in the analysis of the dual nature of law, that is, as a product of society and as a system making itself felt in society. Our concern in this thesis is with law as a social phenomenon from a sociological perspective, and in particular, with the contribution of Marx and Weber to an understanding of the relationship between law and society. The most important aspects of Marx's and Weber's contributions to the sociology of law have to do with philosophical and epistemological considerations. What Weber and Marx thought about human nature and how they conceived science is still fundamental to contemporary developments in the sociology of law. The critical discussion of Marx' and Weber's work attempts to show how partially conflicting and yet complementary sociological perspectives can contribute to a theoretical and conceptual convergence of sociological and legal approaches to the analysis of law and society. Traditionally Weber and Marx have been seen as belonging to two totally opposed philosophical positions. However, we explore here premises which they share, in the hope of opening a new dialogue between their legacies. The approach made here is tentative and certainly incomplete. There are no conclusive remarks which force a particular synthesis upon otherwise 'incommensurate' positions

Peacemaking and Victory: Lessons from Kant’s Cosmopolitanism

In the texts in which Immanuel Kant discusses the principles governing international relations—including texts explicitly dealing with the sources leading states to armed conflict and the circumstances enabling its cessation—he does not directly engage the question “What constitutes victory in war?” This should not be surprising, given that Kant’s treatment of war may be read as consonant with just war thinking for which victory seems an unproblematic concept Yet there are elements in the tone and the substance of his discussion that destabilize a placement of his views as unproblematically part of that tradition. The mordant tone of his dismissal of the Realpolitik guiding “political moralists” suggests a trenchant skepticism about almost any justification offered for leading a state into war. More substantively, an antinomy is at work in the contrast Kant makes, in the two sets of articles for perpetual peace, between a “state of nature” that, construed from the standpoint of the theoretical use of reason, defines the order of international relations as necessarily one of constant war, and the radical transformation of that order, enacted by moral reason in the definitive articles of perpetual peace, into a cosmopolitan order that heeds the categorical imperative “there shall be no war.” In consequence, one may construct a Kantian answer to the question “What constitutes victory in war?” by framing it in reference to this cosmopolitan hope for an international order securing enduring peace. Within the moral horizon of cosmopolitan hope, victory in war—like war itself—is unmasked as morally unintelligible

¿Hacia un paradigma cosmopolita? : pluralismo juridico, ciudadanía y resolución de conflictos. [Reseña]

Reseña de: Nuria BELLOSO MARTÍN, Alfonso DE JULIOS-CAMPUZANO (coords,), ¿Hacia un paradigma cosmopolita? : pluralismo juridico, ciudadanía y resolución de conflictos. Instituto Internacional de Sociología Jurídica de Oñati, Dykinson, Madrid, 2008, 365 pp