Thesis (Ph.D.) -- La Trobe University, 2006. / Research. "A thesis submitted in total fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, La Trobe Law, Faculty of Law and Management, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria". Includes bibliographical references (leaves 318-338). Also available via the World Wide Web.

A pretensão do positivismo jurídico é o esclarecimento teórico para se realizar uma descrição correta do direito. A presente dissertação busca verificar qual a abordagem mais adequada para se alcançar a concretização da separação do direito da moral, sendo que o fio condutor é a obra de H.L.A. Hart, na qual se destaca o livro The Concept of Law. Dessa maneira, o problema a que se propõe o trabalho é evidenciar a complexidade da separação do direito da moral. Pretende-se demonstrar, principalmente através da teoria e obra de Herbert Hart, que Oliver Holmes e Hans Kelsen ao apresentarem seus projetos para separação do direito da moralidade, trataram o direito do ponto de vista descritivo, perdendo a caracterização do próprio direito. O primeiro capítulo é dedicado a apresentar e explicar o projeto positivista, já que condutas exigíveis por regras jurídicas não se confundem com as condutas exigidas por regras morais, ainda que conjuntamente possam existir. Ainda nesse capítulo apresentam-se algumas noções importantes para a compreensão e desenvolvimento do trabalho em relação à teoria de Hart, em especial no que tange ao ponto de vista interno e externo. No segundo capítulo é abordada a obra de Holmes, The Path of the Law, e as principais críticas construídas por Hart e discutidas por Stephen Perry e Scott Shapiro. Partindo-se da perspectiva do homem mau presente na teoria, pretende-se demonstrar que esta é insuficiente para compreender a teoria do direito, em especial nas razões pelas quais um cidadão segue o direito, já que nem todos estariam preocupados em qual é a sanção que receberão do Estado caso desobedeçam à regra. No terceiro e último capítulo demonstra-se quais os problemas da teoria de Kelsen apontadas por Hart. Especialmente no que se refere à ideia de Kelsen de que o direito é só forma, podendo ter qualquer conteúdo, enquanto que Hart acredita que o direito deve possuir conteúdo mínimo. Segundo Kelsen, a estrutura normativa é pressuposta, sendo que a regra funciona como esquema de interpretação e a principal função desta é a sanção. O objetivo final do trabalho é demonstrar que neste projeto de tentar salvar a autonomia do direito, Holmes e Kelsen descaracterizaram o fenômeno jurídico como uma prática social. / The claim of legal positivism is the theoretical clarification to perform a correct description of the law. This work aims to verify the most appropriate approach to achieving the implementation of the separation of law from morality, and the common thread is the work of H.L.A. Hart, which stresses the book The Concept of Law. Thus, the problem that is proposed work is to show the complexity of separating law from morals. We intend to show, especially through the theory and work of Herbert Hart, that Oliver Holmes and Hans Kelsen when presented their projects for separating the right of morality, they treated law of the descriptive point of view, losing the characterization of the law itself. The first chapter is dedicated to present and explain the positivist project, as required by legal conduct rules are not confused with the conduct required by moral rules, albeit jointly may exist. Although this chapter presents some important concepts for understanding and development work in relation to Hart's theory, especially with regard to internal and external point of view. The second chapter discussed the work of Holmes, The Path of the Law, and the main criticisms built by Hart and discussed by Stephen Perry and Scott Shapiro. Starting from the bad man present perspective in theory, intended to demonstrate that this is insufficient to understand the theory of law, in particular the reasons why a citizen follows the law, since not everyone would be worried about what is the sanction which receive if they disobey the rule. In the third and last chapter shows is that the problems of Kelsen's theory pointed out by Hart. Especially with regard to the idea of Kelsen that law is shaped and can have any content, while Hart believes that law should have a minimum content. According to Kelsen, the regulatory framework is presupposed, and the rule works as interpretation scheme and the main function of this is the sanction. The ultimate goal of the work is to demonstrate that this project of trying to save the autonomy of law, Holmes and Kelsen misrepresent the legal phenomenon as a social practice.

This paper shows a mismatch between a real and pressing demand for a philosophical analysis that allows us to explain the emergence of new phenomena in law, and the limited supply of theoretical tools to satisfy this demand by the traditional model of positivistic science of law. After an initial diagnosis of a mismatch between supply and demand, the resistance of legal positivism to accept practical rationality stands out as a core problem of the traditional model of positivistic science of law and the viability of this way of rationality is defended. The paper concludes with a proposal for the reinvention of the philosophy of law of the 21st century that incorporates new objectives and rethinks its method. / En este trabajo se constata un desajuste entre una demanda real y acuciante de un análisis filosófico que permita dar cuenta de la irrupción de nuevos fenómenos en el panorama del derecho y la limitada oferta de herramientas teóricas con que satisfacer esta demanda que aporta el modelo tradicional de ciencia positivista del derecho. Tras el diagnóstico inicial de desajuste entre la oferta y la demanda, se destaca como un problema medular del modelo tradicional de ciencia positivista del derecho su resistencia a asumir una racionalidad de tipo práctico y se defiende la viabilidad de esta forma de pensamiento. El trabajo concluye con una propuesta para la reinvención de la filosofía del derecho del siglo XXI, redefiniendo sus objetivos y replanteando su método.

Law in a transnational context loses the features with which it has been configured since modernity. Classic distinctions between national and international, public and private, substantive and procedural, legal and political, social and legal lose their rigidity in a context of norms, orders, institutions and agents that interact and overlap in diverse and changing ways. A legal theory capable of explaining and evaluating this overflowing legal reality is lacking. A theoretical reflection on international law is not enough. Transnationalism appeals to a plurality of legal actors and spaces that interact to create, interpret and enforce rules which they mutually identify with. Transnationalism does not only refer to the global or the supranational, but to the interdependence of both with the local and transit spaces. And this translates into a change of focus or perspective that is required of each legal agent: management of the interrelation between diverse orders aimed to create spaces for approach, contestation and innovation is a normative requirement and it must be weighed against other legal values. Concepts to which legal theory must focus its attention change their meaning. The work refers to four of those concepts that I consider essential: social group or community, relations between orders and interlegality, coercion and normative diversity. The last part of the paper addresses the way in which these necessary changes have a place in our theories elaborated from the perspective of the great traditions of legal philosophy. What legal positivism, socio-legal theory and legal realism have in common might be an appropriate approach to the review of our discipline. / El derecho, en un contexto transnacional, pierde los rasgos con los que lo hemos configurado desde la modernidad. Las clásicas distinciones entre lo nacional y lo internacional, lo público y lo privado, lo sustantivo y lo procedimental, lo jurídico y lo político, lo social y lo jurídico abandonan su rigidez en un entramado de normas, órdenes, instituciones y agentes que se entremezclan y superponen de modos diversos y cambiantes. Carecemos de una teoría del derecho capaz de explicar y evaluar esta realidad jurídica desbordante. No es suficiente una reflexión teórica sobre el derecho internacional. Lo transnacional apela a una pluralidad de actores y de espacios jurídicos que interaccionan para crear, interpretar y ejecutar normas con las que se identifican mutuamente. Lo transnacional no se refiere solo a lo global o a lo supranacional, sino a la interdependencia de ambos con lo local y los espacios de tránsito. Ello se traduce en un cambio de enfoque o de perspectiva que se exige a cada operador jurídico: la gestión de la interrelación entre órdenes diversos orientada a la creación de espacios para la aproximación, la contestación y la innovación es una exigencia normativa y debe ser ponderada con el resto de valores jurídicos. A partir de ahí cambia el significado de los conceptos a los que ha de orientar su atención la teoría jurídica. El trabajo se refiere a cuatro de dichos conceptos que considero esenciales: grupo social o comunidad, relaciones entre órdenes e interlegalidad, coerción y diversidad normativa. El modo en que los cambios necesarios tienen cabida en la teoría elaborada desde las grandes tradiciones de la iusfilosofía es abordado en la última parte del trabajo, considerando que lo que tienen en común el positivismo jurídico, la teoría socio-jurídica y el realismo jurídico puede ser una aproximación adecuada para la revisión de nuestra disciplina.

The legislative supremacy of Parliament, a dominant characteristic of the Westminster system of government, has for a long time been the basic norm of South African constitutional law. In line with the Westminster prototype, the South African judiciary did not have the power to review the substantive validity of legislation. The creation of a new order, based on a supreme Constitution which entrenches fundamental rights and gives the courts the power to review not on! y the procedural validity but also the substantive validity of legislation, has brought about a significant change. This thesis examines the role of the South African judiciary during the transition from a system of legislative supremacy to one of constitutional supremacy and judicial review. The thesis is based on the interim Constitution of 1993. The entrenchment of fundamental human rights in the Constitution implies a greater role for the judiciary. The judiciary has to apply and interpret the human rights provisions vigorously and fearlessly. The human rights provisions have to be applied and interpreted with a keen awareness that a system of constitutional supremacy differs materially from one of legislative supremacy. In a system of legislative supremacy the intention of the legislature is paramount; in a system of constitutional supremacy the Constitution is supreme and overrides all laws, including Acts of Parliament, which are in conflict with it The doctrine of legislative supremacy has in the past led to a literalist and mechanical application of law; this has had a negative impact on the constitutional role of the South African judiciary. The provisions of a Constitution, especially its human rights provisions, are framed in wide and open ended terms; these need to be elaborated before they can be applied; the nature of these provisions, their purpose and the larger objects of the Constitution are important. The interpretation of the provisions of a supreme Constitution is incompatible with a literalistic and mechanical approach. A purposive and liberal or generous approach is called for. A framework and approach to the interpretation and application of South Africa's Bill of Rights are suggested in the thesis. / Constitutional International and Indigenous Law / LL.D.

A pretensão do positivismo jurídico é o esclarecimento teórico para se realizar uma descrição correta do direito. A presente dissertação busca verificar qual a abordagem mais adequada para se alcançar a concretização da separação do direito da moral, sendo que o fio condutor é a obra de H.L.A. Hart, na qual se destaca o livro The Concept of Law. Dessa maneira, o problema a que se propõe o trabalho é evidenciar a complexidade da separação do direito da moral. Pretende-se demonstrar, principalmente através da teoria e obra de Herbert Hart, que Oliver Holmes e Hans Kelsen ao apresentarem seus projetos para separação do direito da moralidade, trataram o direito do ponto de vista descritivo, perdendo a caracterização do próprio direito. O primeiro capítulo é dedicado a apresentar e explicar o projeto positivista, já que condutas exigíveis por regras jurídicas não se confundem com as condutas exigidas por regras morais, ainda que conjuntamente possam existir. Ainda nesse capítulo apresentam-se algumas noções importantes para a compreensão e desenvolvimento do trabalho em relação à teoria de Hart, em especial no que tange ao ponto de vista interno e externo. No segundo capítulo é abordada a obra de Holmes, The Path of the Law, e as principais críticas construídas por Hart e discutidas por Stephen Perry e Scott Shapiro. Partindo-se da perspectiva do homem mau presente na teoria, pretende-se demonstrar que esta é insuficiente para compreender a teoria do direito, em especial nas razões pelas quais um cidadão segue o direito, já que nem todos estariam preocupados em qual é a sanção que receberão do Estado caso desobedeçam à regra. No terceiro e último capítulo demonstra-se quais os problemas da teoria de Kelsen apontadas por Hart. Especialmente no que se refere à ideia de Kelsen de que o direito é só forma, podendo ter qualquer conteúdo, enquanto que Hart acredita que o direito deve possuir conteúdo mínimo. Segundo Kelsen, a estrutura normativa é pressuposta, sendo que a regra funciona como esquema de interpretação e a principal função desta é a sanção. O objetivo final do trabalho é demonstrar que neste projeto de tentar salvar a autonomia do direito, Holmes e Kelsen descaracterizaram o fenômeno jurídico como uma prática social. / The claim of legal positivism is the theoretical clarification to perform a correct description of the law. This work aims to verify the most appropriate approach to achieving the implementation of the separation of law from morality, and the common thread is the work of H.L.A. Hart, which stresses the book The Concept of Law. Thus, the problem that is proposed work is to show the complexity of separating law from morals. We intend to show, especially through the theory and work of Herbert Hart, that Oliver Holmes and Hans Kelsen when presented their projects for separating the right of morality, they treated law of the descriptive point of view, losing the characterization of the law itself. The first chapter is dedicated to present and explain the positivist project, as required by legal conduct rules are not confused with the conduct required by moral rules, albeit jointly may exist. Although this chapter presents some important concepts for understanding and development work in relation to Hart's theory, especially with regard to internal and external point of view. The second chapter discussed the work of Holmes, The Path of the Law, and the main criticisms built by Hart and discussed by Stephen Perry and Scott Shapiro. Starting from the bad man present perspective in theory, intended to demonstrate that this is insufficient to understand the theory of law, in particular the reasons why a citizen follows the law, since not everyone would be worried about what is the sanction which receive if they disobey the rule. In the third and last chapter shows is that the problems of Kelsen's theory pointed out by Hart. Especially with regard to the idea of Kelsen that law is shaped and can have any content, while Hart believes that law should have a minimum content. According to Kelsen, the regulatory framework is presupposed, and the rule works as interpretation scheme and the main function of this is the sanction. The ultimate goal of the work is to demonstrate that this project of trying to save the autonomy of law, Holmes and Kelsen misrepresent the legal phenomenon as a social practice.

La présente thèse a pour objet de démontrer que la conception du droit de Jean Domat (1625-1696) constitue une issue au positivisme juridique dominant aujourd'hui. Ce dernier fait obstacle à toute interrogation philosophique, n'a pas pu s'opposer à des débordements totalitaristes et contribue à une prolifération des textes qui mène à l'éclatement du lien social. Une pensée sur le droit aujourd'hui doit être facile à concevoir, toujours présente ; il faut qu'elle puisse se sentir dans l'action. Elle doit aussi animer tout le droit, privé comme public et permettre un contrôle complet des règles venant du pouvoir par les membres et responsables de la société, et être partageable par tous, de quelques croyances, religions et opinions qu'ils soient, pour éviter les critiques communautariennes. Il lui faut enfin être issue de l'examen du droit lui-même plutôt qu'être déduite d'une doctrine imposée, être capable de faire obstacle aux déviances politiques et enfin être logique dans ses développements pour être acceptée. Jean Domat découvre que le droit est animé par deux principes :"Nous ne devons pas faire à autrui ce que nous n'aimerions pas qu'autrui nous fasse ; nous devons faire à autrui ce que nous aimerions qu'autrui nous fasse". Ces principes répondent à ces critères. Il reconstruit et présente le droit privé d'une part, et le droit public d'autre part, en montrant comment ils s'organisent selon ces deux principes. Il démontre par une présentation réussie de tout le droit privé que les relations de droit entre particuliers peuvent dans le détail être toutes régies par ces deux principes. Il fait voir également comment l'action politique du Prince peut et doit être conduite par eux. Le Prince est soumis comme quiconque à ces exigences et ne dispose pas de prérogative particulière. Enfin, Jean Domat pose que le sujet n'a pas à obéir à une loi qui ne serait pas conforme à ces principes. Nous montrons que sa pensée, qui a été oubliée, présente une profonde nouveauté tant à son époque que dans le débat contemporain et permet de redonner sens au droit. / This doctoral thesis aims to demonstrate that the conception of the law developed by Jean Domat (1625-1696) constitutes an alternative to legal positivism, which is the dominant approach today. Legal positivism impedes any philosophical interrogation; it was unable to oppose totalitarian excesses, and it contributes to the multiplication of texts, which disrupts social cohesion. A theory of the law today should be pervasive and easy to conceptualize. This theory needs to be action-oriented. It needs to inspire all spheres of the Law, be it private law or public law, and should be designed to place all rules imposed by the government under the complete control of the members and leaders of society. This thought should be shareable by everyone, regardless of creed, religion and opinion, hence avoiding communautarian criticism. Moreover, this theory needs to be the result of an examination of the Law itself rather than being deducted from an imposed doctrine. It needs to be able to stand in the way of political abuses and be logical in its developments to be accepted. Jean Domat discovered that the Law is inspired by two principles: “we shall not do to others what we would not like others do to us; we shall do to others what we would like others do to us”. Both principles are in line with the above-mentioned criteria. Jean Domat reconstructs and presents both private law and public law, and shows that they are organized according to these two principles. He presents the whole of private law and demonstrates that the details of the legal relationships between private individuals are all be governed by these two principles. He also shows that they can and should inspire the political action of the Prince. The Prince does not have any particular status: he is subjected to these requirements, as everybody else. Finally, Jean Domat postulates that a subject does not have to obey a law that is not in conformity with these principles. In this doctoral thesis, I show that his thought, that has been forgotten, is highly original for his time. It is also of high relevance in contemporary debate, as it can help us give some new meaning to the law. sunti as doles dolorisintur a consedi de voluptatur molorporum audae voluptio perferovid quiaerferum aut digendus consedi.

Cette thèse a pour objet l'étude de l'encadrement normatif de l'internement concentrationnaire. Ce concept désigne les règles et procédures produites et appliquées par les administrations concentrationnaires et encadrant le quotidien des détenus internés dans les camps de concentration nazis. Notre étude est pragmatique. Elle se fonde principalement sur l'analyse des archives des administrations concentrationnaires : les règles et procédures concernant l'internement des détenus édictées par les administrations centrales et leur application au niveau du camp de Buchenwald principalement. Cette approche permet de démontrer que l'internement du détenu n'est pas caractérisé par l'arbitraire. Il se déroule au contraire conformément à un encadrement normatif aux caractéristiques spécifiques. Malgré des imperfections formelles dues à leur fondement spécifique sur la Volonté du Führer (Führerwille), les règles et procédures concentrationnaires encadrent l'ensemble de l'internement du détenu : les contacts avec l'extérieur, la répression disciplinaire, le travail forcé et la mort. La participation du personnel SS et civil ou des détenus au fonctionnement du camp se fait ainsi conformément à un encadrement normatif. Cela explique en partie pourquoi les différents acteurs, croyant leurs actes fondés et justifiés par cet encadrement normatif d'allure pseudo-juridique, participèrent au fonctionnement des camps. / The object of this thesis is to study the normative framework of concentration camp internment. The term ‘normative framework’ refers to the rules and procedures established and applied by the concentration camp administrations and which governed the internment of those prisoners in Nazi concentration camps. Our study is pragmatic. It is based primarily on the analysis of concentration camps’ administrative archives: the rules and procedures issued by central administrations concerning the internment of prisoners and their application, mainly at the Buchenwald camp.This approach demonstrates that the period of internment was not characteristically arbitrary. Rather, it occurred in accordance with a normative framework with specific characteristics. Despite formal imperfections due to their specific foundation in the Führer’s Will (Führerwille), concentration camp rules and procedures governed the inmate’s entire internment: contacts with the outside, punishment, forced labor and death. The participation of SS members, or employees of firms using detainee labor or even detainees themselves, was carried out in accordance with a normative framework. This explains in part why the various actors, believing their actions grounded in and justified by this pseudo-legal framework, took part in camp operations.

The purpose of this thesis was to analyze four of the most commonly applied theories in jurisprudence by means of using the philosophical framework of in-tegral theory. Natural law, legal positivism, legal realism and critical legal theory were analyzed to find out how they relate to each other and to see what their strengths and weaknesses are in an integral perspective. The integral theory was created by the American philosopher Ken Wilber (1949-). Two of the main com-ponents of the theory are the four quadrants and the levels of development. The quadrants describe dimensions and perspectives of reality, and consists of the inner individual (subjective) quadrant, the outer individual (objective) quadrant, the inner collective (intersubjective) quadrant and the outer collective (interob-jective) quadrant. Individual values develop through different levels in a specific order, as is described in the second component of the integral theory. Different adult individuals can therefore be on different levels of development. This devel-opment is not only seen in individuals, but is also seen in historical and collective development. The levels that both individuals and societies develop through in-cludes (but are not limited to): the absolutistic (traditional) level, the rational (modern) level and the relativistic (postmodern) level.When using the integral theory to analyze the four theories in jurisprudence it became apparent that they can be mapped onto the integral framework. Natural law, which focuses on morality, can be placed in the intersubjective quadrant, and is mostly associated with the traditional level of development. Legal positiv-ism stems mostly from the interobjective quadrant where law is first and fore-most a system of rules that are enforced by different societal institutions. Legal positivism is typically associated with the modern level of development. Legal realism is also typically associated with the modern level of development and focuses a lot on the objective quadrant: on empiricism and on what judges actu-ally do. Critical legal theory is strongly associated with the postmodern level of development. It emphasizes different kinds of oppression in the intersubjective and in the interobjective quadrant. This thesis presents further examples of how the integral theory can be applied in legal theory and practice.

[pt] Com o fim da II Guerra e a queda do III Reich, ganha ímpeto um ataque jusnaturalista ao positivismo jurídico sob o fundamento de que ele foi o pensamento jurídico predominante na Alemanha da República de Weimar e que continuou sendo durante o regime nazista. Desta forma, o positivismo teve responsabilidade tanto pela queda da república quanto pelo funcionamento genocida do regime de Hitler. Iniciando-se com um artigo de Gustav Radbruch, tais ataques prosseguiram nas vozes de diversos antipositivistas e neoconstitucionalistas como Fuller, Dworkin, Alexy e, mais recentemente, David Dyzenhaus, jurista com quem a presente tese procura debater. Contra estes argumentos, pretende-se aqui refutá-los a partir das categorias fantasmagoria e hostilidade, extraídas do pensamento político-jurídico de Thomas Hobbes. A primeira procura demonstrar que o pensamento jurídico nazista era calcado em uma forma transcendental e eseencialista de pensar, implicando uma concepção do direito como algo já dado e que deveria ser realizado. A segunda determinava que, para realizar esta fantasmagoria, a forma jurídica poderia ser completamente afastada, de modo que o regime nazista, na verdade, seria antipositivista. Com isto, tanto a partir da teoria de Hobbes quanto de exemplos históricos, a presente tese procura afastar tal mito sobre o positivismo, afirmando que, ao contrário, o pensamento jurídico nazista era mais próximo do jusnaturalismo, e que as teses antipositivistas e neoconstitucionalistas de abertura do direito à moral, ao contrário do que pretendem, podem acabar por fornecer meios de ascensão de regimes autoritários, de modo que uma interpretação formal do direito deve ser vista como mais adequada do que uma jurisprudência de princípios. / [en] With the end of World War II and the fall of the Third Reich, a jusnaturalist attack on legal positivism gained momentum on the ground that it was the predominant legal thought in the German Weimar Republic and continued to be so during the Nazi regime. In this way, positivism was responsible both for the fall of the republic and for the genocidal functioning of the Hitler regime. Starting with an article by Gustav Radbruch, such attacks continued in the voices of several antipositivists and neo-constitutionalists such as Fuller, Dworkin, Alexy and more recently David Dyzenhaus, a jurist whose arguments this thesis intends to debate. Against these arguments, the objective here is to refute them with the help of the concepts of phantasmagoria and hostility, extracted from the political-juridical thought of Thomas Hobbes. The first concept seeks to demonstrate that Nazi legal thinking was modeled on a transcendental and essentialist way, implying a conception of law as an a priori that should be realized. The second concept determined that in order to realize this phantasmagoria, the legal form could be completely removed. Thus, the Nazi regime, in fact, would be anti-positivist. Thereby, both with the help of Hobbes s theory and historical examples, this thesis aims to dispel such a myth about positivism, stating that, on the contrary, Nazi legal thought was closer to natural-law, and that the anti-positivist and neo-constitutionalist theses, contrary to what intend or claim, may ultimately provide help to authoritarian regimes seize power. Thus, a formalist law interpretation must be seen as more appropriate than an interpretation based on principles.