Menschenrechte und Mehrheiten

Frank Schorkopf

doi:10.17104/0044-2348-2022-1-19

Contents
- Chapter Expand | CollapseAuthorsPage
- Titelei/Inhaltsverzeichnis
- 1–10 Comment 1–10
  - The Abraham Accords and the Economic Dimension of Peace in the Middle East Achilles Skordas Achilles Skordas
- 11–18 Nachrufe 11–18
  - 11–16 Professor Dr. Dr. h. c. Rudolf Bernhardt (1925 – 2021) Michael Bothe, Rainer Hofmann Michael Bothe, Rainer Hofmann 11–16
  - 17–18 Prof. Dr. Dr. h. c. Rudolf Bernhardt (1925 – 2021) Jerzy Kranz Jerzy Kranz 17–18
- 19–254 Abhandlungen 19–254
  - 19–46 Menschenrechte und Mehrheiten Frank Schorkopf Frank Schorkopf 19–46
  - 47–72 Internationaler Klimaschutz mithilfe nationaler Verfas- sungsgerichte? Erkenntnisse aus dem Klimabeschluss des BVerfG Jannika Jahn Jannika Jahn 47–72
  - 73–120 Völkerrechtlicher Investitionsschutz made in Germany? Zur Genese und Gestalt des ersten BIT zwischen Deutschland und Pakistan (1959) Ingo Venzke, Philipp Günther Ingo Venzke, Philipp Günther 73–120
  - 121–158 Five Shades of Grey – A Linguistic and Pragmatic Approach to Treaty Interpretation Benedikt Pirker, Jennifer Smolka Benedikt Pirker, Jennifer Smolka 121–158
  - 159–194 The Immunisation against COVID-19 as a Global Public Good Jelena Bäumler, Julieta Sarno Jelena Bäumler, Julieta Sarno 159–194
  - 195–222 Jurisdiction Beyond Territorial Sovereignty: Defining the Scope of Exclusive Flag-State Jurisdiction Under Art. 92 UNCLOS Giuliana Lampo Giuliana Lampo 195–222
  - 223–254 Governing Without Being in Power? Controversial Promises for a New Transition to the Rule of Law in Hungary Beáta Bakó Beáta Bakó 223–254
- 255–278 Buchbesprechungen 255–278
  - 255–260 Van Hulle, Inge: Britain and International Law in West Africa. The Practice of Empire Jakob Zollmann Jakob Zollmann 255–260
  - 261–264 Gebeye, Berihun Adugna: A Theory of African Constitutionalism Rainer Grote Rainer Grote 261–264
  - 265–268 Markus, Till: Rechtsvergleichung im Völkerrecht Peter Hilpold Peter Hilpold 265–268
  - 269–278 Van Harten, Gus: The Trouble with Foreign Investment Protection Martin Jarrett Martin Jarrett 269–278
Durchsuchen Sie das Werk
Geben Sie ein Keyword in die Suchleiste ein
CC-BY-SA Access

Zeitschrift für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht / Heidelberg Journal of International Law , page 19 - 46

Menschenrechte und Mehrheiten

Autoren

Frank Schorkopf

DOI
- doi.org/10.17104/0044-2348-2022-1-19
- ISSN: 0044-2348
- ISSN online: 2942-3562
Abstract

Human Rights and Majorities The paper is the written version of the 2nd Doehring Lecture given at the Max Planck Institute in October 2021. The author argues that claims of secular truth return to liberal democracy via a judicially supported expansion of human rights. Those truth claims had been effectively excluded or neutralised in the past. These days identity politics and transformative constitutionalism challenge the abstinence. The two challenges are being discussed in relation to the European Convention of Human Rights and its enforcement mechanism. They are confronted with the argument, that human rights and political majorities are not necessarily as a zero-sum game. They have a more complex interrelationship than the commonly assumed, classical containment of a majority by individual rights of minority representatives. Neither political communities nor the state nor a majority are per se abstract entities posing a threat to individual rights. The fact that there is historical and current empirical evidence not only of threats, but also of violations and even annihilation of rights, is no justification for a pessimistic model of liberal democracy. The author is concerned with the continued shift of parliamentary legislation towards a “culture of justification" thereby promoting the tendency to neutralise the majority principle in representative democracy. A further invigorated culture of justification indirectly puts the parliamentary majority decision under pressure to explain and cohere, which is not complementary to the motives and rationality of political majorities. Because members of democratic majority may pursue the same objective, but not always for the same reasons. Rational rights in court are then confronted with erratic politics in parliament. The paper is therefore a vigorous defence of representative democracy against its modern intellectual threats.
Share