There Is No Hierarchy of Norms, There Is a Hierarchy of Instances: Normative and Subject-Political Justification of the Hierarchy of Normative Legal Acts in the Teachings of Hans Kelsen and Karl Schmitt

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

The problem of legal force and the hierarchy of normative legal acts must be considered at the intersection of political and legal knowledge, since such acts are not just a form of external consolidation of legal norms prescribing a certain model of behavior to the subject, but also express the state-power will, fix the institutional and political framework and the alignment of political forces in society. In the history of political and legal thought, two main ways of substantiating the legal force of normative legal acts have taken shape: normative and subject-political. The most consistently and argumentatively indicated methods are set out in the theoretical works of German lawyers of the last century, Hans Kelsen and Karl Schmitt. The article proposes to compare the views of thinkers on the nature of legal force and the hierarchy of normative legal acts. In the final part of the work, a variant of a conciliatory interpretation of competing approaches is substantiated, and conclusions are drawn about the relative practical significance of the analyzed theoretical models in the context of legal practice and the political process.

About the authors

Anton D. Ukhanov

Vladivostok State University

Author for correspondence.
Email: vinchun.95@list.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-0113-5057

Assistant of the Department of Theory and History of Russian and Foreign Law, Institute of Law

Vladivostok, Russian Federation

References

  1. Aliprantis, N., & Olechowski, T. (2014). Hans Kelsen: The topicality of a great jurist and sociologist of the 20th century. Vienna: Manzsche Verlags- und Universitätsbuchhandlung.
  2. Arzamasov, Yu.G. (2014). Departmental rule-making process in the Russian Federation:
  3. dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Law. Sciences: 12.00.01. Moscow. (In Russian).
  4. Benoit, de A. (2013). Carl Schmitt today. Moscow: IOI. (In Russian).
  5. Bernstorff, von J. (2017). Hans Kelsen’s Judicial Decisionism versus Carl Schmitt’s Concept of the One ‘Right’ Judicial Decision: Comments on Stanley L Paulson, ‘Metamorphosis in Hans Kelsen’s Legal Philosophy’. Modern Law Review, (5), 860–894.
  6. Donhauser, G. (2019). Nomos or Law? Hans Kelsen’s Criticism of Carl Schmitt’s Metaphysics of Law and Politics. Hans Kelsen and the Natural Law Tradition. Brill, 2019, 372–398.
  7. Iestedt, M. (2015). Introduction to the Pure Doctrine of Law by Hans Kelsen. In Hans Kelsen: Pure Doctrine of Law, Justice and Natural Law (pp. 623–625). Saint Petersburg: Publishing House “Alef-press”. (In Russian).
  8. Kelsen, G. (2006). Judicial guarantee of the Constitution (Constitutional Justice. Part 1). Law and politics, (8), 5–14. (In Russian).
  9. Kelsen, G. (2015). Pure doctrine of law: an introduction to the problems of the science of law. Hans Kelsen: Pure doctrine of law, justice and natural law. St. Petersburg: Publishing House “Alefpress”, 107–240. (In Russian).
  10. Kelsen, G. (2013). Who should be the guarantor of the constitution? Schmitt K. The State: Law and politics. Moscow: Territory of the Future publ., 359–410. (In Russian).
  11. Kovalenko, V.I. (2021). Preface. Political process in Russia (1990–2001). Collection of documents. Moscow: Moscow University Press, 5–8. (In Russian).
  12. Krasnova, O.I. (2005). The concept and essence of the federal legislative process of the Russian Federation: abstract of the dissertation for the degree of Candidate of Sciences: 12.00.02. Makhachkala. (In Russian).
  13. Magalhaes, P.T. (2021). The Legitimacy of Modern Democracy A Study on the Political Thought of Max Weber, Carl Schmitt and Hans Kelsen. New York.
  14. Marchenko, M.N. (2017). Sources of law. Moscow: Prospect. (In Russian).
  15. Mehring, R. (1994). Staatsrechtslehre, Rechtslehre, Verfassungslehre: Carl Schmitt Engagement with Hans Kelsen. Archiv für Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie, (80), 191–202. (In German).
  16. Nathan, N.J., & Waller, D.J. (2017). The Constitutional Court and political uncertainty: the break in constitutional continuity and the “rule of judges”. Part 1. Comparative Constitutional Review, (4), 30–46. (In Russian).
  17. Olechowski, T. (2020). Hans Kelsen. Biography of a legal scholar. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck.
  18. Paulson, S.L. (2017). Hans Kelsen and Carl Schmitt: Growing Discord, Culminating in the “Guardian” Controversy of 1931. The Oxford Handbook of Carl Schmitt. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 510–546.
  19. Permyakov, Yu.E. (2022). Legal doctrines of natural law. Moscow: Yurlitinform. (In Russian).
  20. Petrov, A.A., & Shafirov, V.M. (2021). Subject hierarchy of normative legal acts. Moscow: Prospect publ. (In Russian).
  21. Quaritsch, H. (1996). Sovereignty in a state of emergency: on the concept of sovereignty in the work of Carl Schmitt. The State, (1), 1–30.
  22. Rousseau, J.J. (2000). About the social contract. Treatises. Moscow: TERRA-Book Club; CANONPress-C. (In Russian).
  23. Silchenko, N.V. (2018). Problems of hierarchy of sources of law. State and Law, (4), 13–20. (In Russian).
  24. Schmitt, K. (2000). Political theology. Moscow: Canon-Press-C. (In Russian).
  25. Schmitt, K. (2013). The Guarantor of the Constitution. In K. Schmitt, The State: law and politics.
  26. Moscow: Publishing House “Territory of the Future”, 29–220. (In Russian).
  27. Soloviev, A.I. (2017). Political Science. Moscow: Publishing House “Aspect Press”. (In Russian).
  28. Stolleis, M. (2017). The History of Public Law in Germany: The Weimar Republic and National Socialism. Moscow: Political Encyclopedia (ROSSPEN). (In Russian).
  29. Tolstik, V.A. (2002). Hierarchy of sources of Russian law. N. Novgorod: Publishing House “Intelservice Society”. (In Russian).
  30. Varga, Ch. (2012). Pitfalls of legal positivism (mutually refuting and complementary theories of Kelsen and Schmitt). Legal positivism and competition of legal theories: history and modernity (to the 100th anniversary of the death of G.F. Shershenevich): Materials of the VI International Scientific and Practical Conference. Part 1. Ivanovo, 233–254. (In Russian).
  31. Vasev, I.N. (2022). The significance of the hierarchy of normative legal acts for conflict of laws enforcement. Russian-Asian Legal Journal, (1), 4–10. (In Russian).

Copyright (c) 2023 Ukhanov A.D.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies