Bentham: our contemporary?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5380/rfdufpr.v65i3.79714Parole chiave:
Bentham. Rule of Law. Common Law. Publicity. Jurisprudence.Abstract
This article aims to evaluate the contribution of Bentham’s ideas to the jurisprudential debate in view of their relevance vis a vis their contemporary reception. The focus is on Bentham’s revolutionary idea of publicity with its spill-over effects on contemporary debates on the rule of law and accountable and transparent governance. As far as the method is concerned, after having examined Bentham’s ideas on the rule of law and the debate they raised, the focus in second section of this article is specifically on his conception of publicity. Some critical remarks then show that Bentham’s focus on publicity and transparency has been rightly interpreted in the contemporary debate as an important contribution. However, it is their justification that it is judged to be problematic. In fact, the assessment of the fundamental importance of publicity for the rule of law and transparent and accountable governance leads to a critical engagement with contemporary readings of Bentham’s scholarship, in primis that of Gerald Postema, with a development of the latter’s republican interpretation. The direction of travel that is proposed is towards a more liberal republicanism. The article not only shows how Bentham’s contribution should be revaluated in view of contemporary interpretations, but also proposes directions for further research developments according to which contemporary conceptions of regulation need to take a reflexive turn while aiming at legitimate legality at the same time.
Riferimenti bibliografici
ALCHOURRÓN, Carlos E.; BULYGIN, Eugenio. Normative systems. Wein/New York: Springer, 1971.
ALEXY, Robert. La natura del diritto. Per una teoria non-positivista. Napoli: Esi, 2015.
ANDRESANI, Gianluca; STAMILE Natalina. Children of a Lesser God? The Vividown Case and Privacy on Internet. Revista da Faculdade de Direito, UFPR, vol. 64, n. 2, p. 161-182, 2019.
ANDRESANI, Gianluca; STAMILE, Natalina. Mulling Over Hermeneutics [forthcoming].
ANDRESANI, Gianluca; STAMILE, Natalina. Transparency in Internet Regulation and Governance: Arguments and Counter-Arguments with some Methodological Reflections. Revista Brasileira de Estudos Políticos, n. 117, p. 443-476, July/December 2018.
ANDRESANI, Gianluca; WARD, Tony. Arguments and Stories in Legal Reasoning: The Case of Evidence Law. ARSP, [s. l.], v. 106, p. 75-90, 2020.
BARBERIS, Mauro. Giuristi e filosofi. Una storia della filosofia del diritto. Bologna: Il Mulino, 2004.
BENHABIB, Seyla. Dignity in Adversity. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2011.
BENTHAM, Jeremy. A Comment on the Commentaries. In: BURNS; J.H.; HART, H.L.A. (Ed.). A Comment on the Commentaries and A Fragment on Government. London: Athlone Press, 1977.
BENTHAM, Jeremy. A Fragment on Government. 1776.
BENTHAM, Jeremy. Bentham MSS in the University College, London Library. UC l xix, 68, box 69, p. 68.
BENTHAM, Jeremy. In: HART, H.L.A. (Ed.) Of Laws in General. The Collected Works of Jeremy Bentham. Principles of Legislation. London: Athlone Press, 1970 (largely superseded by Limits).
BENTHAM, Jeremy. In: SCHOFIELD, Philip; HARRIS, Jonathan (Ed.). The Collected Works of Jeremy Bentham. Legislator of the World: Writings on Codification, Law, and Education. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998.
BENTHAM, Jeremy. The Limits of Jurisprudence Defined. New York: Columbia University Press, 1945.
BENTHAM, Jeremy. V. 9. Constitutional Code. In: BOWRING, John (Ed.). The works of Jeremy Bentham. 11 volumes. Edinburgh: 1838-1843 [reprinted New York, 1962].
BERNAL, Paul. Internet Privacy Rights: Rights to Protect Autonomy. Cambridge Intellectual Property and Information Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014.
BIRKS, Peter. Equity in the Modern Law: An Excise in Taxonomy. University of Western Australia Law Review, [s. l.], v. 26, n. 1, p. 1-99, July 1996.
BLACKSTONE, William. Commentaries on the Laws of England. 4 v. Oxford, 1765-1769.
BOBBIO, Norberto. Giusnaturalismo e positivismo giuridico. Milano: Edizioni di Comunità, 1972.
BOBBIO, Norberto. Il positivismo giuridico. Torino: Giappichelli, 1961.
BULYGIN, Eugenio. Norme, validità, sistemi normativi. Torino: Giappichelli, 1995.
CHIASSONI, Pierluigi. Da Bentham a Kelsen. Sei capitol per una storia della filosofia analitica del diritto. Torino: Giappichelli, 2016.
CROSS, Rupert. Precedent in English Law. 3. ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1977.
CRUZ, Luis M. Derecho y expectativa. Una interpretación de la teoría jurídica de Jeremy Bentham. Pamplona: EUNSA, 2000.
FERRAJOLI, Luigi. Principia iuris. Teoria del diritto e della democrazia. V. I, II, III. Roma-Bari: Laterza, 2007.
FERRARO, Francesco. Adjudication and Expectations: Bentham on the Role of Judges. Utilitas, [s. l.], v. 25, n. 2, p. 140-160, 2013.
FERRARO, Francesco. Direct and Indirect Utilitarianism in Bentham’s Theory of Adjudication. Journal of Bentham Studies, [s. l.], v. 12, n. 1, p. 1-24, 2010.
FERRARO, Francesco. Jeremy Bentham e la procedura giudiziaria. Diritto & Questioni Pubbliche, [s. l.], n. 9, p. 453-484, 2009.
FRASER, Nancy. From redistribution to recognition? Dilemmas of justice in a ‘post-socialist’ age. In: WILLETT, Cynthia (Ed.). Theorizing multiculturalism: a guide to the current debate. Malden, Massachusetts: John Wiley & Sons, 1998. p. 19-49.
FRASER, Nancy; HONNETH, Axel. Redistribution or recognition? A political-philosophical exchange. London, New York: Verso, 2003.
HABERMAS, Jürgen. Between Facts and Norms: contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1996.
HART, Herbert Lionel Adolphus. Essays on Bentham: Jurisprudence and Political Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1982a.
HART, Herbert Lionel Adolphus. The Demystification of Law. In: Essays on Bentham: Jurisprudence and Political Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1982b.
HIRSCHL, Ran. Towards Juristocracy: The Origins and Consequences of the New Constitutionalism. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2007.
LOSANO, Mario. Sistema e struttura nel diritto. V. I, II, III. Milano: Giuffrè, 2002.
LUCY, William. Law’s Judgement. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2017.
LUHMANN, Niklas. A Sociological Theory of Law. 2. ed. London: Routledge 2016.
LUHMANN, Niklas. Law as a Social System. Translated by Klaus Ziegert, edited by Fatima Kastner and Richard Nobles. Oxford: Oxford University Press 2008.
MARX, Karl. Capital. V. I: The process of production of capital. Edited by Fredrick Engels. Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1887.
MCPHERSON, Michael S. Mill’s Moral Theory and the Problem of Preference Change. Ethics, [s. l.], v. 92, n. 2, p. 252-273, 1982.
MILL, John Stuart. Bentham. In: COWLING, Maurice (Ed.). Selected writings of John Stuart Mill. New York: American Library, 1968.
MILL, John Stuart. Utilitarianism. In: ROBSON, J. M. (Ed.). Collected Works of John Stuart Mill. V. X. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 2006.
MORESO, Josep Joan. Come far combaciare i pezzi del diritto. Analisi e diritto, [s. l.], Ricerche di giurisprudenza analitica, p. 79-118, 1997.
MORESO, Josep Joan. Conflitti tra princìpi costituzionali. Diritto & Questioni Pubbliche, [s. l.], n. 2, p. 19-34, 2002.
MORESO, Josep Joan. La Constitución: modelo para armar. Madrid: Marcial Pons, 2009.
MORESO, Josep Joan; NAVARRO, Pablo E. Orden jurídico y sistema jurídico. Una investigación sobre la identidad y la dinámica de los sistemas jurídicos. Madrid: Centro de estudios Constitucionales, 1993.
NAVARRO, Pablo E. Dinámica y eficacia del Derecho. Un análisis conceptual de la obedencia. México: Fontamara, 2017.
NAVARRO, Pablo E. Kelsen y la eficacia del Derecho. México: Fontamara, 2016.
NAVARRO, Pablo E. La eficacia del Derecho. Madrid: Centro de Estudios Políticos y Constitucionales, 1990.
NAVARRO, Pablo E. Los límites del Derecho. Estudios sobre los compromisos conceptuales del positivismo jurídico. Bogotá: Temis, 2005.
NAVARRO, Pablo E. Tensiones conceptuales en el positivismo jurídico. Doxa, [s. l.], n. 24, p. 133-163, 2001.
NUSSBAUM, Martha C. Mill between Aristotle & Bentham. Daedalus, [s. l.], v. 133, n. 2, p. 60-68, Spring, 2004.
OKIN, Susan Moller. Justice, gender, and the family. New York: Basic Books, 1989.
OLIVECRONA, Karl. The Will of the Sovereign: Some Reflections on Bentham’s Concept of “a law”. American Journal of Jurisprudence, [s. l.], v. 20, n. 1, p. 95-110, 1975.
OSRECKI, Fran. Fighting corruption with transparent organizations: Anti-corruption and functional deviance in organizational behaviour. Ephemera, [s. l.], v. 15, n. 2, p. 337-364, 2015.
POSTEMA, Gerald J. Bentham and the Common Law Tradition. 2. ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019a.
POSTEMA, Gerald J. Bentham and the Common Law Tradition. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989a.
POSTEMA, Gerald J. Bentham on the Public Character of Law. Utilitas, [s. l.], v. 1, n. 1, p. 41-61, May 1989b.
POSTEMA, Gerald J. Coordination and Convention at the Foundations of Law. The Journal of legal Studies, [s. l.], v. 11, n. 1, p. 165-203, 1982.
POSTEMA, Gerald J. Fidelity, Accountability and Trust: Tensions at the Heart of the Rule of Law. In: BUSTAMANTE, Thomas; LOPES DECAT, Thiago (Ed.). Philosophy of Law as an Integral Part of Philosophy. Essays on the Jurisprudence of Gerald J Postema. Oxfort: Hart Publishing, 2020a. p. 33-60.
POSTEMA, Gerald J. Interview with Professor Gerald Postema. By Thomas Bustamante, César Serbena and Natalina Stamile. In: BUSTAMANTE, Thomas; LOPES DECAT, Thiago (Ed.). Philosophy of Law as an Integral Part of Philosophy. Essays on the Jurisprudence of Gerald J Postema. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2020b. p. 301-318.
POSTEMA, Gerald J. Public Practical Reason: An Archeology. Social Philosophy and Policy, [s. l.], v. 12, n. 1, p. 43-86, 1995b.
POSTEMA, Gerald J. Public Practical Reason: Political Practice. In: SHAPIRO, Ian; DECEW, Judith Wagner (Ed.). Theory and Practice, Nomos, [s. l.], v. 37, n. 1, p. 345-385, 1995a.
POSTEMA, Gerald J. Salience Reasoning. Topoi, [s. l.], v. 27, p. 41-55, 2008.
POSTEMA, Gerald J. The Common Law World. In: PATTARO, Enrico (Ed.). A Treatise of Legal Philosophy and General Jurisprudence. Volume 11: Legal Philosophy in the Twentieth Century. Netherlands: Springer, 2011.
POSTEMA, Gerald J. Utility, Publicity, and Law: Essays on Bentham’s Moral and Legal Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019b.
POZZOLO, Susanna. Neocostituzionalismo e positivismo giuridico. Torino: Giappichelli, 2001.
RAWLS, John. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. 1971 [1999].
RAZ, Joseph. The authority of Law: Essays on Law and Morality. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1979 [2009].
SCARPELLI, Uberto. Cos’è il positivismo giuridico. Milano: Edizioni di Comunità, 1965.
SILIQUINI-CINELLI, Luca. Bentham and the Common Law Tradition. Edinburgh Law Review, [s. l.], v. 24, n. 2, p. 318-320, 2020.
SPECTOR, Horacio. Hume’s Theory of Justice. RMM, [s. l.], v. 5, p. 47-63, 2014 [Special Topic: Can the Social Contract Be Signed by an Invisible Hand?].
STAMILE, Natalina. Derechos Fundamentales ¿Ponderación o subsunción? Algunas reflexiones sobre la polémica entre Robert Alexy y Luigi Ferrajoli. In: SÁNCHEZ BRIGIDO, Rodrigo; LONGHINI, Carlos; MARTÍN VILLANUEVA, Carlos (Dir.). Conflictos de Derechos fundamentales. Córdoba, Argentina: Lex Editorial, 2019. p. 81-116.
STAMILE, Natalina. I limiti della (ir)ragionevolezza nella giustizia costituzionale [forthcoming].
STAMILE, Natalina. Razonabilidad (Principio de) – Reasonableness (The Principle of), Voces de Cultura de la legalidad. Eunomía. Revista en Cultura de la Legalidad, [s. l.], n. 8, p. 222 -228, March/August, 2015.
STONE SWEET, Alec. Governing with Judges: Constitutional Politics in Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.
TAYLOR, Linnet; FLORIDI, Luciano; VAN DER SLOOT, Bart (Ed.). Group Privacy: New Challenges of Data Technologies. Netherlands: Springer, 2017.
TINCANI, Persio. Filosofia del diritto. Firenze: Le Monnier Università, 2017.
TINCANI, Persio. Harm principles. Il principio del danno. In: SCIACCA, Fabrizio (Ed.). L’individuo nella crisi dei diritti. Firenze: Il Melangolo, 2009.
ZHAI, Xiaobo. Bentham’s Exposition of Common Law. Law and Philosophy, [s. l.], v. 36, n. 5, p. 525-560, 2017.
Downloads
Pubblicato
Come citare
Fascicolo
Sezione
Licenza
Os autores que publicam na Revista concordam com os seguintes termos:
– os autores mantêm os direitos autorais e transferem à Revista o direito de primeira publicação, com o trabalho licenciado sob a Licença Creative Commons Atribuição 4.0 Internacional, permitido o compartilhamento do trabalho desde que com reconhecimento da autoria e da publicação inicial na Revista;
– os reutilizadores devem dar o crédito apropriado, prover um link para a licença e indicar se mudanças foram feitas, mas de nenhuma maneira que sugira que o licenciante apoia o reutilizador ou a reutilização;
– os reutilizadores não podem aplicar restrições adicionais, termos jurídicos ou medidas de caráter tecnológico que restrinjam legalmente outros de fazerem algo que a licença permita;
– os reutilizadores devem atribuir crédito ao criador e permitir que outros distribuam, remixem, adaptem e desenvolvam o material em qualquer meio ou formato, exclusivamente para fins não comerciais e desde que sob os mesmos termos, respeitados a Lei nº 9.610, de 19 de fevereiro de 1998, e outros normativos vigentes.
