Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence 24 (1):109-128 (2011)
Authors |
|
Abstract |
Two-step proportionality-balancing [TSPB] has become the standard method for human and constitutional rights decision-making. The first step consists in determining whether a rights-provision has been infringed/limited; if the answer to that first question is positive, the second step consists in determining whether the infringement/limit is reasonable or justified according to a proportionality analysis. TSPB has regularly been the target of some criticism. Critiques have argued that both its ‘two-step’ and ‘proportionality’ elements distort reality by promoting a false picture of rights and constitutional decision-making. This would cause negative moral consequences. This article seeks to defend TSPB against these criticisms and to depict it in a more appropriate and favourable light. First, it is argued that both aspects of TSPB do not have the dire moral consequences that opponents suggest they have. Second, it is argued that TSPB, deploying notions such as burdens, presumptions and prima facie/defeasible propositions, constitutes a valuable framework for public argumentation and authoritative decision-making.
|
Keywords | constitutional rights proportionality defeasibility balancing |
Categories | (categorize this paper) |
Options |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Download options
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
American Balancing and German Proportionality: The Historical Origins.Moshe Cohen-Eliya & Iddo Porat - unknown
Review of G.C.N. Webber, The Negotiable Constitution: On the Limitation of Rights (Cambridge University Press, 2009). [REVIEW]Charles-Maxime Panaccio - 2010 - International Journal of Constitutional Law 8 (4):988-995.
Proportionality and Principled Balancing.Aharon Barak - 2010 - Law and Ethics of Human Rights 4 (1):1-16.
Doing Justice to Rights and Values: Teleological Reasoning and Proportionality. [REVIEW]Giovanni Sartor - 2010 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 18 (2):175-215.
Checks and Balances: Judicial Maneuvers of Rights Expansion and Contraction.Lea Bishop Shaver - unknown
Incommensurability, Proportionality, and Rational Legal Decision-Making.Paul-Erik N. Veel - 2010 - Law and Ethics of Human Rights 4 (2):178-228.
The Principle of Proportionality Revisited: Interpretations and Applications. [REVIEW]Göran Hermerén - 2012 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 15 (4):373-382.
The Idea of Socratic Contestation and the Right to Justification: The Point of Rights-Based Proportionality Review.Mattias Kumm - 2010 - Law and Ethics of Human Rights 4 (2):142-175.
Balancing, the Global and the Local: Judicial Balancing as a Problematic Topic in Comparative (Constitutional) Law.Jacco Bomhoff - unknown
A Democratic Defense of Constitutional Balancing.Stephen Gardbaum - 2010 - Law and Ethics of Human Rights 4 (1):79-106.
Analytics
Added to PP index
2011-08-30
Total views
705 ( #11,072 of 2,520,806 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
35 ( #24,878 of 2,520,806 )
2011-08-30
Total views
705 ( #11,072 of 2,520,806 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
35 ( #24,878 of 2,520,806 )
How can I increase my downloads?
Downloads