Suchergebnisse

1015Neutrality — Duties of Neutral Powers — Hague Convention No. V — Duties of Neutrals in Civil War — Spanish Civil War — Internment in France of Members of International Brigade — Whether Internment Ordered to Comply with Obligation of Neutrality or for Political Reasons — Claim of Internee to Compensation from Home State — The Law of Austria.

Claim of indigenous minorities to land are a significant political issue in many parts of the world. These claims, though, are contested, be it in theoretical, political or legal terms. I consider a position, put forward by Jeremy Waldron, that asserts some theoretical reservations towards indigenous minorities' claims to reparations and land. Waldron seems to assume that indigeneity is no important factor regarding land claims and reparative issues. I propose a rivalling account of indigenous land claims, based on the idea of self-determination. Self-determination itself can be understood in two different ways, it can either be conceived as a form of political autonomy or sovereignty, or it can be understood as having pre-political property rights.

Claim of indigenous minorities to land are a significant political issue in many parts of the world. These claims, though, are contested, be it in theoretical, political or legal terms. I consider a position, put forward by Jeremy Waldron, that asserts some theoretical reservations towards indigenous minorities' claims to reparations and land. Waldron seems to assume that indigeneity is no important factor regarding land claims and reparative issues. I propose a rivalling account of indigenous land claims, based on the idea of self-determination. Self-determination itself can be understood in two different ways, it can either be conceived as a form of political autonomy or sovereignty, or it can be understood as having pre-political property rights.

Cover -- I. Conceptual framework -- 1. Claim to correctness -- 2. The classifying and the qualifying connection -- 3. First order and second order correctness -- II. The Claim to Correctness in the Classical Debate -- 1. Hans Kelsen -- 1.1. THE NEGATIVE SIDE: WHAT LAW DOES NOT CLAIM -- A. The Purity Thesis -- (i) Kelsen's relative connection between law and morality -- (ii) The claim to correctness and the purity thesis -- (ii) The Theory of Legal Hierarchy (Stufenbaulehre) -- B. The interpretation theory -- 1.2. THE POSITIVE SIDE: WHAT LAW CLAIMS -- A. The Claim to truth and the claim to authority -- (i) The Purity Thesis and the Legal Hierarchy Thesis (Stufenbaulehre) -- (ii) The interpretation theory -- 1.3. AN OPEN ISSUE FOR DISCUSSION -- My reasoning for this goes as follows: -- The last question is this: do law-applying organs raise a claim to correctness according to Kelsen? -- 2. Lon Fuller -- 2.1. THE NEGATIVE SIDE. THE ENTERPRISE CONCEPT THESIS: NO CLAIM TO AUTHORITY. -- 2.2. THE POSITIVE SIDE. THE INTERNAL MORALITY OF LAW: A CLAIM TO PROCEDURAL CORRECTNESS -- (i) Classifying and Qualifying Connections -- (ii) Interpretation -- 3. Gustav Radbruch -- 3.1. RADBRUCH's LEGAL PHILOSOPHY OF 1932 -- A. The Philosophical Background -- Radbruch presents the foregoing in a summarized way as follows: -- B. The Law Triad -- (i) Reality and Sense -- (ii) The Idea of Law -- a) Justice -- b) Legal Certainty -- c) Purposiveness -- 3.2. GUSTAV RADBRUCH's CLAIM TO CORRECTNESS AS OF 1932 -- A. The Claim to Correctness in Radbruch's System of Three Triads -- (i) Classifying Connections -- (ii) Qualifying Connections. -- 3.3. RADBRUCH's LEGAL PHILOSOPHY AFTER 1945 -- III. Recent Debates about the Claim to Correctness -- 1. Joseph Raz -- 1.1. THE CONTENT OBJECTION -- 1.2. ALEXY's REPLY -- 1.3. SOME ADDITIONAL POINTS IN THE DISCUSSION -- 2. Neil MacCormick.