(1) Global constitutionalism and theory of Law;
(2) Theory of justice and global justice;
(3) Theories of legal interpretation and argumentative
technique;
(4) Conceptions of democracy and the role of constitutional
jurisdiction
(1) The research studies the evolution of supranational law and in
particular the transition from the fragmentation of the law to its
progressive constitutionalization. Of this process the study
analyzes the consequences for the theory of law.
(2) The study examines the most relevant contemporary theories of
justice and verifies the consequences with regard to the
possibility of a global justice.
(3) Here we explore the use of legal interpretation to identify
argumentative criteria for judicial decision by which to address
the problem of the indeterminacy and value-centeredness of
interpretive processes.
(4) Here, different conceptions of constitutional and deliberative
democracy debated in contemporary legal philosophy will be
discussed in light of the scope they each allow for constitutional
jurisdiction.
(1) The research studies the evolution of supranational law and in
particular the transition from the fragmentation of the law to its
progressive constitutionalization. Of this process the study
analyzes the consequences for the theory of law. The research aims
to examine how we can speak of a constitutionalization of
supranational law and to analyze the descriptive and prescriptive
dimensions of this process. Of this evolution will be then examined
the effects on the theory of law. This is in particular of: (a) the
concept of law, (b) the relationship between law and justice, (c)
the theory of rights, (d) the theory of Constitution, (e) soft law
and coercion; (f ) legal reasoning.
(2) The study examines the most relevant contemporary theories of
justice and verifies the consequences with regard to the
possibility of a global justice. We will analyze the major
contemporary theory of justice in order to assess their
implications for the construction of a global theory of justice. In
particular, we will examine the different and divergent
implications that can be derived from the theory of justice of John
Rawls and the paradigm shift theory proposed by A. Sen.
(3) Most contemporary theories of law (neoconstitutionalism,
discourse theory, inclusive and critical legal positivism) build
crucially on the idea that an adequate understanding of law
requires taking into account the interpretation and application of
law. On all of these approaches, the interpretation of law is
analyzed with a view to singling out criteria of rationality in
judicial decision-making on which basis to find objective solutions
to the problem of the indeterminacy and evaluative bias of
interpretive processes. The point, then, is to develop rational
argumentative methods and criteria, or criteria that, in Habermass
words, will make it possible to decide without contradicting
oneself, and in such a way as to be rationally acceptable. We will
thus assess different criteria of rationality and the different
role and relevance that each of the argumentative canons can
have.
(4) Legal-philosophical reflection on the transformation of
contemporary systems enters the arena of the political by
concerning itself with conceptions of democracy. Two main
conceptions can be distinguished, the one constitutional and the
other deliberative. The first conception points up the limitations
and constraints placed on democratic decision-making power; the
second conception tends to lay emphasis on the conditions subject
to which self-determination processes can actually be realized. One
significant point of difference between these two conceptions is on
the question of how much latitude should be accorded to the action
of constitutional courts, or how much authority they should have to
intervene and declare a law constitutional or unconstitutional by
their power of judicial review: the constitutional conception
accentuates these powers, while the deliberative one tends to
instead reduce them. Specifying the role of the courts is an
important part of contemporary reflection on the law, for it
involves specifying the meaning of the structure and legitimation
of contemporary law. We will thus study these conceptions and
assess the role they assign to constitutional jurisdiction.
