Differences between J. Rawls and B. Savaneli
If we correctly compare Rawlsian and mine theories, we discover that Rawlsian theory is not strictly connected with the legal theory of justice, but is linked with the political theory of justice, which define moral obligations of political institutions before the principles of justice. Rawls analyze justice in the frameworks of diversity of social, political and economic life of the society. But investigation of social, political and economic aspects of justice is the subject not legal, but social, political and economical sciences. If we operate by the normative correlation between human rights and obligation of states concerning justice, Rawls consider a justice as a basis to provide cooperation in conditions where there are opposing religious, philosophical and moral convictions, and this basis is to be found in the idea of overlapping consensus. For us consensus could be reach through the human rights law standards. Rawlsian theory of justice coextensive with political justice: it is a theory of political justice. Our theory coextensive with legal justice: it is a theory of assesses of justice of law through the human rights standards.
______
Legal Aspect of Justice of Equality and Inequality
Annotation
I
“Justice based on two pillars: fundamental human rights and legal capacity. Fundamental human rights concerning justice means that all persons have equal fundamental human rights despite of their recognition by the states. Legal capacity concerning justice means that all persons have equal right to possess private rights despite of their recognition by the states.
Fundamental human rights and legal capacity in their entity characterise each person as the subject of law, define his/her general position in the society.
At the same time legal capacity is a summary expression of those different private (social and economic) rights, which each person could be possess on the ground of Law and his/her different interests. In other words legal capacity is abstract opportunity to possess such rights. Legal capacity includes in its own equal right to possess inequal private (social and economic) rights, because human beings are differed by individual signs such as: physical and mental strength, manual labor, clearness of purpose, resourcefulness, enterprise and other individual characteristics concerning to which the law has no ability to equalize the individuals. The law can and make only one: recognise for all equal chance to satisfy different social, economic and individual interests, in other words equal capacity to possess private rights. As a result natural and legal persons are distinguished by the particular positions in the society, by the different volumes of private rights on different social and economic benefits. And that is justifiable. In other words inequality in private (social and economic) rights is a condition of justice.
Private rights in their entity characterize each person as the subject of legal relations, define his/her particular position in the society. Thus individually inequal persons have inequal volumes of private rights. The obligation of any state is to support fairness balance between inequal private rights as guarantee of sustainable development of society.”
For the illustration this point of view we criticized a communist inhuman political and legal system in which, despite of recognition a broad list of fundamental human rights in soviet constitution, volume of legal capacity was so poor that it could not satisfy even a minimal level of human private interests.
See: Bidzina Pkhaladze (Savaneli), Subject of Law and Content of Legal Capacity, in J.“Law”, Tbilisi, 1966, N 6 (in Georgian); Bidzina Pkhaladze (Savaneli), Correlation between Legal Capacity and Human Rights, Scientific Works of the Institute of AllSoviet Legislation, N 14, Moscow, 1967 (in Russian); Bidzina Pkhaladze (Savaneli), Correlation between Fundamental Human Rights and Legal Capacity, Synopsis of dissertation, ed. AllSoviet Institute of Legislation, Moscow, 1968 (in Russian); Bidzina Pkhaladze (Savaneli), Legal forms of personal position in the society, Monograph, ed. Georgian Academy of Sciences, Tbilisi, 1969 (in Russian); Review on the monograph in J. “Revue International de Droit Compare”, Vingt-Troisieme Anne N 1, Janvier-Mars 1971, Paris; Review on the monograph in J. “Ruch Pravniczi, Economiczny i Sociologiczny”, Kwartal Trzeci, 1971, Warszawa-Poznan; Review on the monograph in J. “Jurisprudence”, N 3, 1970, Sanct-Petersbourg.
More information: /Personal pages/savaneli
Yahoo/Search the WEB: savaneli
III Congreso Internacional Historia a Debate Santiago de Compostela
... CURRICULUM VITAE. Mr. BIDZINA SAVANELI. D.O.B: ... "Professor Savaneli is a prominent authority of Philosophy of Law and founder of International Human Rights Education in ... Congress 2004...
... ponencias/cv/savanelli.htm - 20k –
Cached - More from this site
FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar MSN Toolbar Get it now!