IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hig/wpaper/62-law-2016.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Legal Conceptions of Hans Kelsen and Eugen Ehrlich: Weighing Human Rights and Sovereignty

Author

Listed:
  • Mikhail Antonov

    (National Research University Higher School of Economics)

Abstract

This paper considers the relevance of the legal conceptions put forward by Eugen Ehrlich and Hans Kelsen to the contemporary debate on human rights and their limits. It is asserted that the conceptions of Ehrlich and Kelsen adopt a multifaceted approach to the law and, at the same time, a philosophical perspective that secures human autonomy and freedom from “great narratives” and governmental intervention. This perspective opens up a variety of opportunities for better understanding the balance between individual and collective interests, and between the significance of rights and sovereignty. Both conceptions are still relevant to debates in the fields of international and constitutional law, and to legal philosophies about the limits of human rights and the epistemic conditions for identifying these rights, and how these rights can the same time lay claim to a universal character while remaining culturally embedded. The principle of relativity that underpins the Pure Theory of Law of Kelsen and the legal sociology of Ehrlich are of particular importance for discussing the “relative universality” of human rights

Suggested Citation

  • Mikhail Antonov, 2016. "The Legal Conceptions of Hans Kelsen and Eugen Ehrlich: Weighing Human Rights and Sovereignty," HSE Working papers WP BRP 62/LAW/2016, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:hig:wpaper:62/law/2016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.hse.ru/data/2016/01/18/1135140740/62LAW2016.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    human rights; constitutionalization; Hans Kelsen; pure theory of law; Eugen Ehrlich; legal sociology; normativity; social conventions;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • K10 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - General (Constitutional Law)

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hig:wpaper:62/law/2016. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Shamil Abdulaev or Shamil Abdulaev (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/hsecoru.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.