Acceso usuarios
Argentina
En este ensayo analizo la ambigua relación entre los principios de validez y eficacia y el concepto de Norma Hipotética Fundamental. Examino esta tensión conceptual para comprender de qué forma Kelsen responde a estas preguntas: “What constitutes the unity of a multitude of norms?; Why does a certain norm belong to a certain order?;Why is a norm valid?; What is the reason for its validity?” (Kelsen, 1960, 193). Para comprender la génesis y estructura de la Norma Hipotética Fundamental y para entender la lógica que subyace a esta tensión estructural entre la validez y la eficacia, analizo la diferencia entre el sentido objetivo y subjetivo de las normas. Asimismo, explico el criterio que le permite a Kelsen diferenciar una banda de ladrones de un Estado. Por último, examino el concepto de revolución y de cambio de un sistema jurídico para aclarar la tensión estructural entre los conceptos de validez y eficacia
In this essay I discuss the unclear relationship between the principles of validity and effectiveness and the concept of Basic Norm. I examine this conceptual tension to understand the way Kelsen deals with these questions:"What Constitutes the unity of a multitude of norms?; Why does a certain norm belong to a certain order?; Why is a valid norm?; What is the reason for its validity? "(Kelsen, 1960, 193). In order to comprehend the genesis and structure of the Basic Norm and to understand the logic behind this structural tension between validity and effectiveness, I discuss the differentiation between the subjective and objective meaning of a norm. Furthermore, I explain the criterion that allows Kelsen to differentiate a gang of robbers from a State. Finally, I examine the conceptof revolution and change of a legal system to enlighten the structural tension between the concepts of validity and effectiveness
