Foto del docente

Giorgio Bongiovanni

Professor

Department of Legal Studies

Academic discipline: IUS/20 Philosophy of Law

Research

(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.