Skip to main content
Log in

The Strange Case of the Protective Perimeter: Liberties and Claims to Non-Interference

  • Published:
Law and Philosophy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper I describe some difficulties raised by the so-called thesis of the protective perimeter of liberties (ToPP). According to this thesis, a privilege does not necessarily involve a claim to non-interference, and a claim to non-interference does not necessarily presuppose a privilege. I argue that the first part of this thesis relies on a misunderstanding of ‘interference with a liberty’ (a misunderstanding that surfaces in the examples to which the thesis is applied) and that the second part of this thesis contains a misleading description of what is involved in having a claim to non-interference.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alessandro Spena.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Spena, A. The Strange Case of the Protective Perimeter: Liberties and Claims to Non-Interference. Law and Philos 31, 161–184 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10982-011-9120-3

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10982-011-9120-3

Keywords

Navigation