









 | |
LEGAL
THEORY AND JUDICIAL REVIEW: HUMAN RIGHTS PROTECTION THROUGH COURTS
(in co-operation
with Cardozo Law School, New York)
5 - 23 July, 1999
Course Director:
Professor András Sajó (Central European University, Budapest)
Course description
Courts did play a remarkable role in
the human rights revolution of the past decades. This course reviews the
impacts of courts’ human right protecting activities on the theory of constitutional
adjudication and on legal theory in general. Legal theory and judicial
protection of human rights is a two way process. Modern reflections on
law and rights developed in legal theory, the understanding of the role
of courts in society had an impact on judicial activism. These are the
key problems of the course that will be discussed in an East-West comparative
context.
The social and political changes in Eastern
Europe and the gradual transformation of the economy which erodes traditional
forms of social organization in the West represent new challenges to law
and seriously test the validity of established legal theories. The course
not only offers a critical review of contemporary theories (hermeneutics,
critical theory autopsies, functionalism, liberalism)but it confronts post
modernism in light of actual legal developments. Is post-modern law possible?
What is the relevance of norms in uncertainty?
What is the place of rights in today’s judicial reasoning?. How, as a formal
matter, do (and should) courts respond to recognized problems in the political
system -- constitutional replacement, formal amendment, amendment though
“interpretation,” etc.? One of the major theoretical issues then becomes
whether we can distinguish between legitimate (or at least plausible) “interpretations”
as against what we might call “pseudo-interpretations” that in effect represent
the court’s making what it thinks a necessary change in the constitutional
order because the political system itself is blocked from making the change.
Two alternative judicial approaches to
rights protection will be compared: review “incidenter” which is most typical
in the US and the system of review known as “principaliter” devised
first by the Austrian-German constitutional courts, and followed in both
Western and Eastern Europe.
The substantive human rights issues
discussed include privacy, abortion, sexual orientation, euthanasia, and
free speech.
Target groups
Lawyers, philosophers and political
scientists, judges, human rights activists, graduate students.
|