Balancing rights and interests: on Schauer’s asymmetry thesis
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18256/2238-0604.2021.v17i1.4495Keywords:
Principles Theory, Balancing, Rights and InterestsAbstract
Fred Schauer has argued that the last step of the proportionality test, balancing, is subject to a significant asymmetry. While we could balance interests against each other, we could not do so with rights, lest we destroy the special normative status of rights. If this asymmetry exists, the applicability of balancing would be significantly limited. I analyse the asymmetry thesis and discuss its merits and weaknesses. I then demonstrate how we can accommodate the rationale behind Schauer’s thesis within principles theory’s account of balancing. I thus, ultimately, reject Schauer’s thesis. My article confirms that proportionality adjudication includes the balancing of rights and interests.
Downloads
References
ALEXY, Robert. A Theory of Constitutional Rights. Translation: Julian Rivers. Oxford University Press. 2002.
ALEXY, Robert. Die Gewichtsformel. In. JICKELI, Joachim; KREUTZ, Peter; REUTER, Dieter. (Orgs). Gedächtnisschrift für Jürgen Sonnenschein. 2003.
ALEXY, Robert. Formal principles: Some replies to critics. International Journal of Constitutional Law, v. 12. 2014.
ALEXY, Robert. Postscript, A Theory of Constitutional Rights. Translation Julian Rivers. Oxford University Press, 2002.
ALEXY, Robert. Proportionality, constitutional law, and sub-constitutional law: A reply to Aharon Barak. International Journal of Constitutional Law, v. 16, 2018.
ALEXY, Robert. The Absolute and the Relative Dimension of Constitutional Rights. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, v. 37, n. 1, 2017.
ALEXY, Robert. The Weight Formula. In. STELMACH, Jerzy; BARTOSZ, Brozek; ZALUSKI, Wojciech. (Orgs), Studies in the Philosophy of Law. Frontiers of the economic analysis of law. Jagiellonian University Press. 2007.
BADENHOP, Johannes. Normtheoretische Grundlagen der Europäischen Menschenrechtskonvention. Nomos. 2010.
BARAK, Aharon. Proportionality and Principled Balancing. Law & Etichs of Human Rights, v. 4, 2010.
BEATTY, Devid M. The Ultimate Rule of Law. New York: Oxford University Press, 2004.
BOROWSKI, Martin. Limiting Clauses: On the Continental European Tradition of Special Limiting Clauses and the General Limiting Clause of Art 52(2) Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Legisprudence 197. 2007.
BVerfGE 13, 97 (Handwerksordnung) (1961) 1 BvL 44/55 13 BVerfGE 97 (BVerfG).
KLATT, Matthias. ‘Positive Obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights. HJIL 681. 2011.
KLATT, Matthias. A discricionariedade epistemica no direito constitucional: Trad. Fausto Santo de Morais. In. MORAIS, Fausto S d; BORTOLOTI, José C K (eds). Jurisdição Constitucional e os Desafios à Concretização dos Direitos Fundamentais. Editora Lumen Juris, 2016.
KLATT, Matthias. An Egalitarian Defense of Proportionality-Based Balancing: A Response to Luc B. Tremblay. 12(4) Int’l J Const L 891. 2014.
KLATT, Matthias. Epistemic Discretion in Constitutional Law. 10(1) Int’l J Const L 69. 2012.
KLATT, Matthias. Proportionality and Justification. In. HERLIN-KARNELL, Ester; KLATT, Matthias (eds). Constitutionalism Justified: Rainer Forst in Discourse. Oxford University Press, 2019.
KLATT, Matthias. The Legitimacy of Constitution-Conform Interpretation. 2019.
KLATT, Matthias; MEISTER, Moritz. Proportionality - A Benefit to Human Rights?: Remarks on the ICon Controversy. 10(3) Int’l J Const L 687. 2012.
KLATT, Matthias; MEISTER, Moritz. The constitutional structure of proportionality. Oxford Univ. Press, 2012.
KLATT, Matthias; SCHMIDT, J. Spielräume im Öffentlichen Recht: Zur Abwägungslehre der Prinzipientheorie. Mohr Siebeck, 2010.
MEISTER, Moritz. Das System des Freiheitsschutzes im Grundgesetz. Editora Duncker & Humblot, 2011.
MÖLLER Kai. The Global Model of Constitutional Rights. USA. Oxford University Press, 2012.
PULIDO. Carlos Bernal. On Alexy’s Weight Formula’. In. MENÉNDEZ, Agustín J; ERIKSEN, Erik O. Arguing Fundamental Rights. Law and Philosophy Library. Vol 77. Springer. 2006.
RAWLS, John. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1971.
RAWLS, John. Political liberalism. The John Dewey essays in philosophy. vol 4. Columbia Univ. Press, 1993.
RIVERS, Julian. A theory of constitutional rights and the British constitution. A Theory of Constitutional Rights. Translation: Julian Rivers. Oxford University Press, 2002.
SCHAUER, Frederich. Proportionality and the Question of Weight. In. HUSCROFT, Grant; MILLER, Bradley W; WEBBER, Grégoire C N. (orgs). Proportionality and the Rule of Law: Rights, Justification, Reasoning. Cambridge University Press, 2014.
SILVA, Virgílio Afonso da. Comparing the Incommensurable: Constitutional Principles, Balancing and Rational Decision. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, v. 31, 2011.
TSAKYRAKIS, Stavros. Proportionality: An Assault on Human Rights?. International Journal of Constitutional Law, v. 7, i. 3, p. 468-493.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
I declare the present article unpublished, as well as not be subject to any other submission process to another scientific journal.
I declare that I authorize the publication of the article by the magazine on the World Wide Web and the knowledge about non-remuneration by virtue of its publication, with no copyright of an equity nature.
Also, as author, I take civil and criminal responsibility for the content of the published work, after reading the guidelines for authors and agreeing with them.
The work can be accessed by any interested party and reproduced and / or published provided that proper reference is made according to the ABNT for the purpose of dissemination of scientific academic production.How to Cite
