The dogmatism of the contemporary “legal” self-determination: The right of self-determination as a juridical and philosophical issue
PDF (Spanish)

Keywords

The subject’s self-determination
“new rights”

Categories

How to Cite

di Marco, R. (2020). The dogmatism of the contemporary “legal” self-determination: The right of self-determination as a juridical and philosophical issue. Derecho Público Iberoamericano, 12, 99-120. https://revistas.udd.cl/index.php/RDPI/article/view/400

Attribution 4.0 International CC BY 4.0

You are free to:

  1. Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
  2. Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
  3. The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.

Under the following terms:

  1. Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
  2. No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.

Notices:

You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .

No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Abstract

The essay deals with delicate and controversial juridical issue, powerfully drawn to the attention of all jurists and been subject of Costitutional Courts’ and CEDU’s jurisprudence. The subject’s self-determination is an essential condition of law, but it is also a condition of subjective sovereignty’s claim representing the basis of “new rights” (euthanasia, consensual homicide...). The reflections developed in the text reveal the contraddiction inside of modern self-determination theory. This “new right”, infact, is presented as a human right and it is defended as a form of negative-freedom, but this kind of self-determination transform every individual freedom in legal freedom, id est in a form of freedom limited by positive law.

PDF (Spanish)

References

ALVEAR TELLEZ, Julio, La libertad moderna de conciencia y de religión. El problema de su fundamento, Madrid, Marcial Pons, 2013.

ARENDT, Hannah, Che cos’è la politica?, Milano, Edizioni di Comunità, 1995.

ARISTÓTELES, Política, edición bilingue, traducción de Jules Barthélemy-Saint-Hilaire, Paris, Librairie philosophique de Ladrange, 1874.

AYUSO TORRES, Miguel, “¿Hay un poder constituyente?”, en Miguel AYUSO TORRES (dir.), El problema del poder constituyente, Madrid, Pons, 2012.

BOEZIO, Severino, “Liber contra Eutichen et Nestorium (De persona et duabus naturis)”, in Jacques Paul MIGNE, Patrologia latina, Parigi, Garnier, 1882-1891, lxiv.

CAPOTOSTI, Renzo, Etica e responsabilità per il governo delle imprese, Torino, Giappichelli, 2013.

CASTELLANO, Danilo, L’ordine della politica, Napoli, Edizioni Scientifiche Italiane, 1997.

CASTELLANO, Danilo, L’ordine politico-giuridico “modulare” del personalismo contemporaneo, Napoli, Edizioni Scientifiche Italiane, 2007.

CASTELLANO, Danilo, Orden ético y derecho, Madrid, Marcial Pons, 2010.

CASTELLANO, Danilo, Ordine etico e diritto, Napoli, Edizioni Scientifiche Italiane, 2011.

CASTELLANO, Danilo, Racionalismo y derechos humanos, Madrid, Marcial Pons, 2004.

CASTELLANO, Danilo, Razionalismo e diritti umani, Torino, Giappichelli, 2003.

CASTELLANO, Danilo, “Prefazione”, in Pietro GRASSO, Costituzione e secolarizzazione,

Padova, CEDAM, 2002.

CERETI, Carlo, Diritto costituzionale italiano, Torino, UTET, 1963.

DAHRENDORF, Ralf, Legge e ordine, Milano, Giuffrè, 1991.

DI MARCO, Rudi, Autodeterminazione e diritto, Napoli, Edizioni Scientifiche Italiane, 2017.

HEGEL, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich, Lezioni sulla filosofia della storia, Firenze, La Nuova Italia, 1965.

HEIDEGGER, Martín, Essere e tempo, Milano, Mondadori, 2011.

KANT, Immanuel, “Sopra il detto comune “questo può essere giusto in teoria ma non vale per la pratica”, in Norberto BOBBIO, Luigi FIRPO, Vittorio MATHIEU (a cura di), Scritti politici e di filosofia della storia e del diritto, Torino, UTET, 1965.

KANT, Immanuel, Stato di diritto e società civile, Roma, Editori Riuniti, 1982.

LOCKE, John, Secondo trattato sul governo, Milano, BUR, 2013.

MATTEUCCI, Nicola, Lo Stato moderno, Bologna, Il Mulino, 1993.

MONTEJANO, Bernardino, “Reportaje a Danilo Castellano”, in Centuriòn, Buenos Aires, octubre-noviembre 2014.

MOUNIER, Emmanuel, Il personalismo, Milano, Garzanti, 1952.

RORTY, Richard, La priorità della democrazia sulla filosofia, in Gianni VATTIMO (a cura di), Filosofia ’86, Roma-Bari, Laterza, 1987.

ROSMINI, Antonio, Filosofia del diritto, Padova, C.E.D.A.M., 1967.

ROUSSEAU, Jean-Jacques, Emilio o dell’educazione, Roma, Armando, 1994.

SEGOVIA, Juan Fernando, La ley natural en la teleraña de la razón. Ética, Derecho y política en John Locke, Madrid, Marcial Pons, 2014.

SOLARI, Gioele, La formazione storica e filosofica dello Stato moderno, Napoli, Guida, 2000.

STRAUSS, Leo, “Introduzione all’esistenzialismo di Heidegger”, in AA .VV ., Su Heidegger, cinque voci ebraiche, Roma, Donzelli, 1998.

TODESCAN, Franco, Itinerari critici dell’esperienza giuridica, Torino, Giappichelli, 1991.

TORRENTE, Andrea e Piero SHLESINGER, Manuale di diritto privato, Milano, Giuffrè, 2004.

TRABUCCHI, Alberto, Istituzioni di diritto civile, Padova, CEDAM, 2005.

VON GERBER, Carl Friedrich Wilhelm, Diritto pubblico, Milano, Giuffrè, 1971.

WARREN, Samuel, Louis Brandeis, “The Right to Privacy”, in Harvard Law Review, vol. iv, Nº 5, Harvard, 1890.

ZAGREBELSKY, Gustavo, Il diritto mite, Torino, Einaudi, 1992.