UDTR — Radar mondial des droits de la Nature

WALDRON ON CHARTERS OF RIGHTS: THE SCALES OF RESPECT

Identification

Clé publique

doi:10.71548/8101

Auteurs

Matthew Grellette

Année déclarée

2006

Langue déclarée

en

Type source

dissertation

Première détection

2026-11-09T19:14:49.898395+00:00

Dernière observation des métadonnées

2026-11-09T19:14:49.898395+00:00

Dernière vérification HTTP

Non effectuée

Résumé documentaire — langue originale

Jeremy Waldron condemns constitutional arrangements which attempt to incorporate democratic decision making together with a Charter of Rights and the attendant practice of judicial review. By playing on the fact of ubiquitous political disagreement among the members of any polit~, and by drawing upon a liberal value-set, Waldron asserts that the constitutional privileging of particular moral principles contained within a Charter of Rights must be seen to impinge upon the political respect which democratic decision making conveys unto I each member of a given polity. On this basis he contends that such mixed constitutional arrangements ought to be abandoned in favor of the purely democratic. The go~ of this thesis is to determine the soundness of this argument. Because it is evident that Waldron's critique would be successful given the conventional understanding of the nature and role of Charters of Rights, his argument is tested against a new conception of such constitutional mechanisms put forward by Wilfrid Waluchow. Although it is contended that Waluchow's position does not succeed in evading Waldron's claims concerning the democratic disrespect inherent in the adoption of a Charter of Rights, the nature of the investigation reveals the possibility of other manners in which such a constitutional mechanism does respect the citizenry of a state. On this basis it is contended that Waldron's arguments are invalid. More specifically, it is argued that it does not necessarily follow from the fact that Charters of Rights are in tension with pure democratic decision-making that they ought to be regarded as constitutionally undesirable.

Identifiants

OPENALEX

W1511908092

DOI

10.71548/8101

Repères documentaires

Famille documentaire

Thèse

Types déclarés par les sources

dissertation

Les mentions d’entités ne constituent pas une preuve de reconnaissance juridique. La juridiction étudiée est distincte du pays d’affiliation des auteurs.

Sources

OpenAlex · Document 1 · Document 2 · Document 3

• DOI · https://doi.org/10.71548/8101
• Document · http://hdl.handle.net/11375/10594
• OpenAlex · https://openalex.org/W1511908092

Relations bibliographiques documentées

Références et liens déclarés par les sources ; ils ne constituent pas une preuve juridique ni une qualification UGLC. Affichage limité à 20 références sortantes.

• openalex:w100069118 · CITES
• openalex:w1511395866 · CITES
• openalex:w1559613097 · CITES
• openalex:w1561570225 · CITES
• openalex:w1574128309 · CITES
• openalex:w1574735272 · CITES
• openalex:w1599232439 · CITES
• openalex:w1603427163 · CITES
• openalex:w2012297130 · CITES
• openalex:w2035902442 · CITES
• openalex:w2045052834 · CITES

0 références entrantes au sein du corpus détecté

Statut documentaire

Pertinence à examiner

Bibliothèque

Cette identité n’est pas encore intégrée à la Bibliothèque juridique.