Search results

Klaus Günther analysiert Verfassungskompromisse, grundsatz- und aktionsprogrammatische Kompromisse in Parteien, Gesetzgebungskompromisse (Parteienfinanzierung/Abtreibung) und Plebiszitäre Kompromisse systemvergleichend. Für Deutschland, Frankreich, Großbritannien und die Niederlande verbindet er die exemplarische Empirie kompromissförmigen Dissensmanagements mit der konzeptionell-typologischen Erschließung eines Forschungsfeldes, das bislang vernachlässigt wurde.

The paper reinterprets classical approaches to punishment as communication. First, it analyses the origins of punishment understood as censorship, which is confronted with the instrumentalism of preventive intervention. Then, it points out that the communicative character should not be limited to punishment as a reaction to crime but should be extended to it and to the criminal law derived from democratic procedures. Finally, Habermas contributions to the theory of speech acts are analysed. These are applied to the normative structure underlying the intersubjective relations of criminal law. ; El artículo hace una reinterpretación de los enfoques clásicos de la pena como comunicación. Primero, analiza los orígenes de la pena entendida como censura, la que se enfrenta al instrumentalismo de la intervención preventiva. Luego, señala que el carácter comunicativo no debe limitarse a la pena como reacción del delito, sino que debe extenderse a este y también a la ley penal que nace de los procedimientos democráticos. Para finalizar, se analizan las contribuciones de Habermas a la teoría de los actos de habla. Estas se aplican a la estructura normativa subyacente a las relaciones intersubjetivas del derecho penal.

AbstractWith a view to EU democracy, Jürgen Habermas introduced the idea that the relationship between the roles of state citizens and European citizens should be understood as a form of 'divided sovereignty'. This notion is a constructive solution to theoretical problems resulting from the goal of realizing national and European democracy at the same time, but one might suspect that one of the suggested roles comes more naturally to most citizens. While state citizenship can draw on national identities, EU citizenship appears artificial and constructed, and hence not very attractive. I argue that the contraposition of 'natural' vs. 'artificial' sovereigns is inadequate. Both parts of divided sovereignty need to be understood in a constructivist sense as they are attributed to legal associations. Much in the same way as the idea of national sovereignty had to be appropriated in learning processes, citizens could grow into the role of EU sovereigns.