Proportionality in Constitutional and Human Rights Interpretation

In this article the author, in a context in which principles and the principle of proportionality are at the heart not only of jurisprudence but also of constitutional and human rights interpretation, claims that when there were those ready to raise the hand to declare a unanimous winner, some critics and skeptics appeared. In addition, to the traditional objections, they worry that proportionality invites to doing unnecessary balancing between existing rights, inventing new rights out of nothing at all (in detriment of those already well-established ones), and even worse in doing so balancing some rights away. In order to answer to such objections and to reject them, as well as to reinforce the importance of this development, the author: first, revisits the constitution of principles and of the principle of proportionality, which per definitio contradicts each one of this objections; and, then, restates the constitution of the principle of proportionality as a principle of principles not only in constitutional and human rights interpretation but also in legislation, including constitutional reformation, and adjudication.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Flores,Imer B.
Format: Digital revista
Language:English
Published: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Instituto de Investigaciones Jurídicas 2013
Online Access:http://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2007-43872013000100005
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
id oai:scielo:S2007-43872013000100005
record_format ojs
spelling oai:scielo:S2007-438720130001000052015-11-12Proportionality in Constitutional and Human Rights InterpretationFlores,Imer B. Interpretation Principles Proportionality Rights In this article the author, in a context in which principles and the principle of proportionality are at the heart not only of jurisprudence but also of constitutional and human rights interpretation, claims that when there were those ready to raise the hand to declare a unanimous winner, some critics and skeptics appeared. In addition, to the traditional objections, they worry that proportionality invites to doing unnecessary balancing between existing rights, inventing new rights out of nothing at all (in detriment of those already well-established ones), and even worse in doing so balancing some rights away. In order to answer to such objections and to reject them, as well as to reinforce the importance of this development, the author: first, revisits the constitution of principles and of the principle of proportionality, which per definitio contradicts each one of this objections; and, then, restates the constitution of the principle of proportionality as a principle of principles not only in constitutional and human rights interpretation but also in legislation, including constitutional reformation, and adjudication.info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessUniversidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Instituto de Investigaciones JurídicasProblema anuario de filosofía y teoría del derecho n.7 20132013-12-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articletext/htmlhttp://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2007-43872013000100005en
institution SCIELO
collection OJS
country México
countrycode MX
component Revista
access En linea
databasecode rev-scielo-mx
tag revista
region America del Norte
libraryname SciELO
language English
format Digital
author Flores,Imer B.
spellingShingle Flores,Imer B.
Proportionality in Constitutional and Human Rights Interpretation
author_facet Flores,Imer B.
author_sort Flores,Imer B.
title Proportionality in Constitutional and Human Rights Interpretation
title_short Proportionality in Constitutional and Human Rights Interpretation
title_full Proportionality in Constitutional and Human Rights Interpretation
title_fullStr Proportionality in Constitutional and Human Rights Interpretation
title_full_unstemmed Proportionality in Constitutional and Human Rights Interpretation
title_sort proportionality in constitutional and human rights interpretation
description In this article the author, in a context in which principles and the principle of proportionality are at the heart not only of jurisprudence but also of constitutional and human rights interpretation, claims that when there were those ready to raise the hand to declare a unanimous winner, some critics and skeptics appeared. In addition, to the traditional objections, they worry that proportionality invites to doing unnecessary balancing between existing rights, inventing new rights out of nothing at all (in detriment of those already well-established ones), and even worse in doing so balancing some rights away. In order to answer to such objections and to reject them, as well as to reinforce the importance of this development, the author: first, revisits the constitution of principles and of the principle of proportionality, which per definitio contradicts each one of this objections; and, then, restates the constitution of the principle of proportionality as a principle of principles not only in constitutional and human rights interpretation but also in legislation, including constitutional reformation, and adjudication.
publisher Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Instituto de Investigaciones Jurídicas
publishDate 2013
url http://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2007-43872013000100005
work_keys_str_mv AT floresimerb proportionalityinconstitutionalandhumanrightsinterpretation
_version_ 1756230733124337664