Legal Hierarchies in the Works of Hans Kelsen and Adolf Julius Merkl

Abstract

At Austrian universities, the problem of 'Precedence of Constitution' is usually taught within the framework of the 'theory of the hierarchical structure of the legal order', an essential part of the so-called 'Pure Theory of Law.' Whilst the famous jurist Hans Kelsen (1881-1973) was the founder of the Pure Theory, the 'theory of the hierarchical structure' has been introduced by Kelsen's disciple Adolf J. Merkl (1890-1970) in 1918 and is accepted also by those who do not follow Kelsen's Pure Theory. According to the Pure Theory, the basis of the validity of a norm can only be another norm, which can be seen as the 'higher' norm. The legal order can be seen as a structure of 'higher' and 'lower' norms, and within the legal order of a certain state, its constitution is the highest norm of all-the 'paramount law', as has been said by US Supreme Court in its famous case Marbury v. Madison, in 1803. The 'theory of the hierarchical structure' also gives the justification for constitutional justice: the constitutional court reviews whether the legislator has remained within the framework of the constitution. 'Precedence of Constitution' or, in German, Verfassungsvorrang, the phrase which is in the centre of this conference, is hardly ever used in the Austrian legal language, even almost unknown. The problem discussed here, which is the question of the relationship of the constitution to other norms, in particular to statutes, is usually taught at Austrian universities within the framework of the 'theory of the hierarchical structure of the legal order'-in German: Lehre vom Stufenbau der Rechtsordnung.

The conflict between Rights of Nature and mining in Ecuador: Implications of the Los Cedros Cloud Forest case for biodiversity conservation

“…Environmental Law, Human Rights law, Civil Rights law and Rights of Nature). Applying the Kelsen Pyramid of laws (Olechowski, 2018), we classified laws within a hierarchy, from the ‘grundnorm’ as the foundational norm to the top‐norm. Using this classification we filter and identify laws used in both the appeal and the ruling, those presented in the appeal but not used by the Court in its ruling, and those used by the Court alone that were absent in the appeal.…”

Restorative Justice dalam Tinjauan Hukum Progresif: Eksistensi dan Implikasi

“…Dalam perkembangannya, gagasan hukum progresif sejatinya merupakan "antpipati" terhadap beberapa gagasan yang bercorak analytical jurisprudence (Wildan Nafis, 2020). Dalam analytical jurisprudence yang dikembangkan oleh Hans Kalsen yang mengatakan bahwa norma hukum bukan semata diterapkan oleh organ atau dipatuhi oleh masyarakat, melainkan karena dibentuk oleh lembaga yang berwenang sehingga memiliki karakter "positif" dan "imperatif" (Olechowski, 2018). Karakter ini menegaskan bahwa hukum harus "dipisahkan" dari moral, tata susila, agama, maupun aspek-aspek non-hukum lainnya.…”