The Method in Comparative Constitutional Law: Critical Contributions for a Comparative Constitutional Methodology
Article Sidebar
You are free to:
Share, copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the terms of the license.
Under the following terms:
Acknowledgment:
You must give proper credit , provide a link to the license , and indicate if any changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any manner that suggests that the licensor endorses you or your use.
Non-Commercial:
You may not use the material for commercial purposes.
No Additional Restrictions:
You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license allows.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for items of material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .
No guarantees are given. The license may not give you all the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
Main Article Content
Abstract
More than a century ago, the appeal to comparative law arose in different spheres of the judicial thought in several Western countries. Nonetheless, in the constitutional law is an activity more characteristic of the late WWII period. With the pretension of contributing, although minimally, to the overcoming of this history of limited inter-connections between comparative and constitutional law; in this article, we seek to analyze the function of the method in comparative constitutional law with a special emphasis in the theoretical hypothesis of the viability of an epistemological schematization of the categories that might integrate what will be named as comparative constitutional methodology. Thus, we must initially rebuild the origin of the comparative constitutional law, its objectives and the importance of the problem in any comparative constitutional research, given that its epistemological autonomy, especially concerning the positive constitutional law, constitutes a theoretical supposition of the proposition that will ultimately be defended in this article.
Article Details
References
Ancel, M. (1971). Utilité et méthodes du droit comparé: éléments d’introduction générale à l’étude comparative des droits. Ides et Calendes.
Aristóteles. (2000). La Constitución de Atenas (A. Tovar, trad.). Centro de Estudios Políticos y Constitucionales.
Belaid, S. (1974). Essai sur le pouvoir créateur et normatif du juge. Librairie Générale de Droit et de Jurisprudence.
Biscaretti di Ruffía, P. (1988). Introduzione al diritto costituzionale comparato (vol. 1). Giuffrè.
Blondel, J. (1985). Généralités: le comparatisme. En M. Grawitz y J. Jeca (coords.), Traité de science politique (vol. 2) (pp. 1-26). PUF.
Bunge, M. (1995). La ciencia: su método y su filosofía. Editorial Sudamericana.
Cover, R. M. (1982). The Origins of Judicial Activism in the Protection of Minorities. The Yale Law Journal, 91(7), 1287-1316.
David, R. (1998). Les grands systèmes du droit contemporains (droit comparé). Dalloz.
Fioravanti, M. (2004). Costituzione e popolo sovrano. La Costituzione italiana nella storia del costituzionalismo moderno. Il Mulino.
Fioravanti, M. (2009). Costituzionalismo. Percorsi della storia e tendenze attuali. Laterza.
Fioravanti, M. (2012). As doutrinas da constituição em sentido material. Revista de Estudos Constitucionais, Hermenêutica e Teoria do Direito, 4(2), 103-109. https://doi.org/10.4013/rechtd.2012.42.01
Gadamer, H. (1977). Verdad y método (A. Aparicio y R. de Agapito, trads.). Sígueme.
Glenn, H. P. (2007). Legal Traditions of the World (3.a ed.). Oxford University Press.
Häberle, P. (1992). Rechtsvergleichung im Kraftfeld des Verfassungsstaates. Duncker & Humblot.
Häberle, P. (1999). Per una dottrina della costituzione europea. Quaderni Costituzionali, 19(1), 3-30.
Jouanjan, O. (2005). Une histoire de la pensée juridique en Allemagne, 1800-1918: idéalisme et conceptualisme chez les juristes allemands du XIXème siècle. PUF.
Kmiec, K. D. (2004). The Origin and Current Meaning of 'Judicial Activism'. California Law Review, 92(5), 1441-1477. https://bit.ly/2NCzDzv
Lambert, É. (2005). Le gouvernement des juges et la lutte contre la législation social aux États-Unis. Dalloz; Giard (Original publicado en 1921).
Malmström, A. (1969). The System of Legal Systems: Notes on a Problem of Classification in Comparative Law. Scandinavian Studies in Law, 13, 127-149.
Mattei, U. y Monateri, P. (1987). Introduzione breve al diritto comparato. Cedam.
Mirkine-Guetzévitch, B. (1949). Les méthodes d’étude du droit constitutionnel comparé. Revue Internationale de Droit Comparé, 1(4), 397-417.
Mortati, C. (1998). La costituzione in senso materiale. Giuffrè.
Pegoraro, L. y Rinella, A. (2013). Diritto Costituzionale Comparato: aspetti metodologici. CEDAM.
Pizzorusso, A. (1998). Sistemi giuridici comparati. Giuffrè.
Pizzorusso, A. (1999). La Costituzione ferita. Laterza.
Ponthoreau, M-C. (2010). Droit(s) Constitutionnel(s) Comparé(s). Economica.
Popper, K. (1962). La lógica de la investigación científica. Tecnos.
Rodotà , S. (1996). Magistratura e política in Italia. En E. B. Liberati, A. Ceretti y A. Giasanti (coords.), Governo dei giudici: la magistratura tra diritto e política (pp. 17-29). Feltrinelli.
Sampaio, J. A. L. (coord.) (2004). 15 anos de Constituição: história e vicissitudes. Del Rey.
Sacco, R. (1980). Introduzione al diritto comparato. UTET.
Santano, A. C. (2020). Derechos humanos para el desarrollo de una sociedad realmente globalizada. Opinión Jurídica, 19(38), 39-57. https://doi.org/10.22395/ojum.v19n38a1
Seiler, D. (2004). La méthode comparative en science politique. Armand Colin.
Streck, L. (2011). Verdade e Consenso: constituição, hermenêutica e teorias discursivas (4.a ed.). Saraiva.
Sunstein, C. R. (1987). Lochner’s Legacy. Columbia Law Review, 87(5), 873-919. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3281030
Teixeira, A. V. (2019). La méthode en droit constitutionnel comparé: propositions pour une méthodologie constitutionnelle comparative. Revue du Droit Public et de Science Politique en France et à l’Étranger, 1, 217-239.
Teixeira, A. V. (2016a). Fondamenti di diritto costituzionale comparato. Aracne Editrice.
Teixeira, A. V. (2016b). Constitucionalismo transnacional: por uma compreensão pluriversalista do Estado constitucional. Revista de Investigações Constitucionais, 3(3), 141-166. https://bit.ly/2YBdQ1j
Teubner, G. (2012). Constitutional Fragments: Societal Constitutionalism and Globalization. Oxford University Press.
Tribe, L. (2008). The Invisible Constitution. Oxford University Press.
Tushnet, M. (2009). The Inevitable Globalization of Constitutional Law. Virginia Journal of International Law, 49(4), 985-1006.
Vianna, L. (1999). A judicialização da política e das relações sociais no Brasil. Revan.
Von Bogdandy, A., Goldmann, M. y Venzke, I. (2017). From Public International to International Public Law: Translating World Public Opinion into International Public Authority. European Journal International Law, 28(1), 115-145. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chx002
Walker, N. (2012). Postnational Constitutionalism and Postnational Public Law: A Tale of Two Neologisms. Journal Transnational Legal Theory, 3(1), 61-85. https://doi.org/10.5235/TLT.3.1.61
Young, E. (2002). Judicial Activism and Conservative Politics. University of Colorado Law Review, 73(4), 1140-1216.
Zagrebelsky, G. (1970). Sulla consuetudine costituzionale nella teoria delle fonti del diritto. UTET.
Zweigert, K. y Kötz, H. (1998). Introduzione al diritto comparato (vol. 1) (B. Pozzo, trad.). Giuffrè; Mohr Siebeck Verlag. (Original publicado en 1971).