Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Law & Ethics of Human Rights

Editor-in-Chief: Stopler, Gila

Editorial Board: Benvenisti, Eyal / Cohen-Eliya, Moshe / Macedo, Stephen / Rosenblum, Nancy

2 Issues per year


CiteScore 2016: 0.58

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2016: 0.252
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2016: 0.736

Online
ISSN
1938-2545
See all formats and pricing
More options …

The Idea of Socratic Contestation and the Right to Justification: The Point of Rights-Based Proportionality Review

Mattias Kumm
Published Online: 2010-09-30 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.2202/1938-2545.1047

The institutionalization of a rights-based proportionality review shares a number of salient features and puzzles with the practice of contestation that the Socrates of the early Platonic dialogues became famous for. Understanding the point of Socratic contestation, and its role in a democratic polity, is also the key to understanding the point of proportionality based rights review. To begin with, when judges decide cases within the proportionality framework they do not primarily interpret authority. They assess reasons. Not surprisingly, they, like Socrates, have been prone to the charge that they offend the values and traditions of the community.The article discusses four types of pathologies that occasionally infect democratic decision-making that rights-based proportionality review is particularly suited to identify. But more basic and equally important is a second kind of justification: Proportionality-based judicial review institutionalizes a right to contest the acts of public authorities and demand a public reasons-based justification. Having a legal remedy that allows for the contestation of acts by public authorities before an impartial and independent court and demanding its justification in terms of public reason is as basic a commitment of liberal democracy as the right to vote. The real question is not whether judicial review is democratically legitimate, but how judicial institutions ought to be structured to best serve their democracy-enhancing and rights protecting purpose. If Socrates was right to insist that the practice of contestation he engaged in deserves the highest praise in a democratic polity, it is equally true that a well structured and appropriately embedded court engaged in rights based proportionality review deserves to be embraced as a vital element of liberal constitutional democracy.

Keywords: principle of proportionality; judicial review; Socratic contestation; public reason; justification

About the article

Published Online: 2010-09-30


Citation Information: Law & Ethics of Human Rights, Volume 4, Issue 2, Pages 142–175, ISSN (Online) 1938-2545, DOI: https://doi.org/10.2202/1938-2545.1047.

Export Citation

©2011 Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG, Berlin/Boston. Copyright Clearance Center

Citing Articles

Here you can find all Crossref-listed publications in which this article is cited. If you would like to receive automatic email messages as soon as this article is cited in other publications, simply activate the “Citation Alert” on the top of this page.

[1]
Theunis Roux
Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 2017, Volume 13, Number 1, Page 123
[3]
Johan Rochel
De Ethica. A Journal of Philosophical, Theological and Applied Ethics, 2017, Volume 4, Number 1, Page 31
[4]
Thomas Boysen Anker, Klemens Kappel, Douglas Eadie, and Peter Sandøe
Marketing Theory, 2012, Volume 12, Number 3, Page 267
[5]
VLAD PERJU
Global Constitutionalism, 2012, Volume 1, Number 02, Page 334
[6]
Alasdair Cochrane
Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 2012, Volume 15, Number 3, Page 309

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in