Gustav Radbruch vs. Hans Kelsen: A Debate on Nazi Law

Ratio Juris 18 (2):162-178 (2005)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

. Can the label “law” apply to rules as amoral as the enactments of the Nazis? This question confronted the courts in Germany after 1945. In dealing with it, the judges had to take sides in the philosophical debate over the concept of law. In this context, the prominent voices of the legal philosophers Gustav Radbruch and Hans Kelsen could not go unheard. This paper draws on what could have been the “Radbruch‐Kelsen debate on Nazi Law.” In examining the debate, it will argue for a substantive account of the morality of the law, as expressed in Radbruch's Formula

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-09-02

Downloads
250 (#165,531)

6 months
26 (#366,767)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

References found in this work

The Concept of Law.Hla Hart - 2012 - Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press UK. Edited by Joseph Raz & Penelope A. Bulloch.
Pure theory of law.Hans Kelsen - 1967 - Clark, N.J.: Lawbook Exchange.
General theory of law and state.Hans Kelsen - 1945 - Union, N.J.: Lawbook Exchange. Edited by Hans Kelsen.
The Question of German Guilt.Karl Jaspers - 2008 - In Guénaël Mettraux, Perspectives on the Nuremberg Trial. Oxford, GB: Oxford University Press.
IV*—Moral Cognitivism, Moral Relativism and Motivating Moral Beliefs.David Wiggins - 1991 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 91 (1):61-86.

View all 19 references / Add more references