Keywords
How to Cite
Abstract
The article analyzes the requirements entailed by one of the desiderāta of the Rule of Law theorized by LON L. FULLER. This is the desiderātum of clarity. It is argued that clarity contains two distinct requirements: intelligibility and specificity. Both feature in Fuller's treatment of clarity, but they are not adequately distinguished. In particular, the idea of specificity is neither explained nor justified. It is the aim of this article to provide that explanation and justification, as well as to show their consequences. It holds that the consequences are both practical and theoretical. As to practical consequences, clarity as specificity sheds light on a potential deficiency in the creation and administration of rules in a legal system that is different from those entailed by other desiderāta: the vagueness, fewness, and lack of differentiation of legal norms. As to theoretical consequences, our analysis helps explain why the law has the specific quality of being a relatively intricate normative body, articulated by a set of more or less specific, multiple and differentiated rules. In this sense, the desiderātum of clarity as specificity has a strategic importance in Fuller's set of desiderāta.
ALEXANDER, LARRY & SHERWIN, EMILY, The Rule of Rules: Morality, Rules, and the Dilemmas of Law (Duke University Press, Durham, North Carolina, 2001).
ALEXY, ROBERT, Teoría de los derechos fundamentales (2nd ed., Centro de Estudios Políticos y Constitucionales, CEPC, Madrid, 2008). Disponible en: http://www.pensamientopenal.com.ar/system/files/2014/12/doctrina37294.pdf
BENTHAM, JEREMY, The Limits of Jurisprudence Defined (CHARLES WARREN EVERETT ed., Columbia University Press, New York, 1945).
CARBONELL-SÁNCHEZ, MIGUEL, ed., Neoconstitucionalismo(s) (Trotta, Madrid, 2009).
DWORKIN, RONALD, Law's Empire (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1986). Disponible en: http://www.filosoficas.unam.mx/~cruzparc/empire.pdf
DWORKIN, RONALD, Taking Rights Seriously, with a New Appendix, a Response to Critics (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1978).
ENDICOTT, TIMOTHY A. O., Vagueness in Law (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2000).
FINNIS, JOHN, Natural Law and Natural Rights (2nd ed., Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2011). Disponible en: https://edisciplinas.usp.br/pluginfile.php/287316/mod_folder/content/0/John%20Finnis%20Natural%20Law%20and%20Natural%20Rights%20Clarendon%20Law%20%202011.pdf
FULLER, LON L., The Morality of Law (2nd ed., Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut, 1969).
HART, HERBERT LIONEL ADOLPHUS, The Concept of Law (3rd ed., Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2012).
HIRSCHL, RAN, Towards Juristocracy: The Origins and Consequences of the New Constitutionalism (Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA, 2007).
RAWLS, JOHN, A Theory of Justice (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1999).
RAZ, JOSEPH, Practical Reason and Norms (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1990).
RAZ, JOSEPH, The Authority of Law: Essays on Law and Morality (2nd ed., Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2009).
RUNDLE, KRISTEN, Forms Liberate. Reclaiming the Jurisprudence of Lon L. Fuller (Hart Publishing, Oxford, 2012).
SIMMONDS, NIGEL, Central Issues in Jurisprudence. Justice, Law and Rights (2nd ed., Sweet & Maxwell, London, 2002).
STONE-SWEET, ALEC, Governing with Judges. Constitutional Politics in Europe (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2000).
URBINA, FRANCISCO J., A Critique of Proportionality and Balancing (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2017).
WEBBER, GRÉGOIRE; YOWELL, PAUL; EKINS, RICHARD; KÖPCKE, MARIS; MILLER, BRADLEY W. & URBINA, FRANCISCO J., Legislated Rights: Securing Human Rights through Legislation (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2018).
Contribución en obras colectivas
POZZOLO, SUSANA Un constitucionalismo ambiguo, en Neoconstitucionalismo(s), 159 - 186 (MIGUEL CARBONELL-SÁNCHEZ, ed., Trotta, Madrid, 2009).
WALDRON, JEREMY, Rule of Law, en The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (EDWARD N. ZALTA, ed., Metaphysics Research Lab., Stanford University, Stanford, California, 2016). Disponible en: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rule-of-law/
YOWELL, PAUL, Legislation, Common Law and the Virtue of Clarity, en Modern Challenges to the Rule of Law, 101-128 (RICHARD EKINS, ed., LexisNexis, Wellington, 2011).
Revistas
ASSY, RABEEA, Can the Law Speak Directly to its Subjects? The Limitation of Plain Language, 38 Journal of Law and Society, 3, 376-404 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6478.2011.00549.x
BURG, WIBREN VAN DER, Lon L. Fuller's Lessons for Legislatures (Erasmus Working Paper Series on Jurisprudence and Socio-Legal Studies No. 14-01, 2014). Disponible en: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2460614
CENTENERA, FERNANDO, Buscando el valor de la claridad de las normas: algunas reflexiones desde el pensamiento de Lon L. Fuller, 10 Bajo Palabra, Revista de Filosofía, 61-70 (2015). http://dx.doi.org/10.15366/bp2015.10.004. Disponible en: https://revistas.uam.es/bajopalabra/article/view/bp2015.10.004/2262
CENTENERA, FERNANDO, La claridad legislativa en el pensamiento de Lon L. Fuller: un análisis desde la teoría de la legislación, 1 Anales de Derecho, 1-27 (2015). Disponible en: https://revistas.um.es/analesderecho/article/view/188801
ESCUDERO-ALDAY, RAFAEL, Argumentos para la recuperación de la teoría de Lon L. Fuller, 19 Anuario de Filosofía del Derecho, 309-331 (2006). Disponible en: https://dialnet.unirioja.es/descarga/articulo/756901.pdf
FINNIS, JOHN, Natural Law and Legal Reasoning, 38 Cleveland State Law Review, 1-13 (1990). Disponible en: https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1822&context=clevstlrev
FULLER, LON L., The Forms and Limits of Adjudication, 92 Harvard Law Review, 2, 353-409 (1978). DOI: 10.2307/1340368. Disponible en: https://people.rit.edu/wlrgsh/Fuller.pdf
MORESO, JOSEP-JOAN, Principio de legalidad y causas de justificación (sobre el alcance de la taxatividad), 24 Doxa: Cuadernos de Filosofía del Derecho, 525-545 (2001). Disponible en: https://rua.ua.es/dspace/bitstream/10045/10219/1/doxa24_19.pdf
REAL-ALCALÁ, J. ALBERTO DEL, El problema de la vaguedad en la legislación, 3 Papeles de Teoría y Filosofía del Derecho, 1-16 (2010). Disponible en: https://e-archivo.uc3m.es/bitstream/handle/10016/8578/Del_Real_PTFD_3_2010.pdf
SUNSTEIN, CASS R. & VERMEULE, ADRIAN, The Morality of Administrative Law, 131 Harvard Law Review, 1924-1978 (2018). Disponible en: https://harvardlawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/1924-1978_Online.pdf
VERGARA-BLANCO, ALEJANDRO, Sistema y autonomía de las disciplinas jurídicas. Teoría y técnica de los “núcleos dogmáticos”, 41 Revista Chilena de Derecho, 3, 957-991 (2014). Disponible en: https://scielo.conicyt.cl/pdf/rchilder/v41n3/art08.pdf
WALDRON, JEREMY, Lucky in Your Judge, 9 Theoretical Inquiries in Law, 1, 185-216 (2008). Disponible en: http://eial.tau.ac.il/index.php/til/article/view/679/638
WALDRON, JEREMY, Thoughtfulness and the Rule of Law (NYU School of Law, Public Law Research Paper No. 11-13, 2011). Disponible en SSRN: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1759550
This journal is registered under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Public License. Thus, this work may be reproduced, distributed, and publicly shared in digital format, as long as the names of the authors and Pontificia Universidad Javeriana are acknowledged. Others are allowed to quote, adapt, transform, auto-archive, republish, and create based on this material, for any purpose (even commercial ones), provided the authorship is duly acknowledged, a link to the original work is provided, and it is specified if changes have been made. Pontificia Universidad Javeriana does not hold the rights of published works and the authors are solely responsible for the contents of their works; they keep the moral, intellectual, privacy, and publicity rights.
Approving the intervention of the work (review, copy-editing, translation, layout) and the following outreach, are granted through an use license and not through an assignment of rights. This means the journal and Pontificia Universidad Javeriana cannot be held responsible for any ethical malpractice by the authors. As a consequence of the protection granted by the use license, the journal is not required to publish recantations or modify information already published, unless the errata stems from the editorial management process. Publishing contents in this journal does not generate royalties for contributors.