IMPUNITY (OR NOT) FOR CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE

  • Sava Vojnović Pravni fakultet Univerziteta u Beogradu
Keywords: democracy, civil disobedience, punishing, rule of law, justice, legal certainty, Rawls, Dworkin, role of the judges, proportionality

Abstract


Starting from Rawls's concept of civil disobedience, the author argues that it is carried out on justified moral grounds and must be distinguished from all other tortious actions. It is a communicative act that non-violently and publicly points out problems within a system, thereby guaranteeing itself a position of loyalty to the law, not the opposite. The paper first analyzes the concept of civil disobedience, along with the question of its justification, as well as Dworkin's point of view on the interpretation of disputed legal norms by citizens who refuse to obey them. It then examines the purposes of punishment as stated in the theory of sanctions – applied to civil disobedience, along with the potential treatment of civil disobedience by judges. The author believes that in each specific case, according to the judgment of the court, such disobedient individuals could either be given reduced sanctions or be completely exempted from punishment.

References

LITERATURA

 

1.     Brand-Ballard, J., 2010, Limits of Legality, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

2.     Brownlee, K., 2012, Conscience and Conviction: The Case for Civil Disobedience, Oxford, OUP.

3.     Dahl, R., 1971, Polyarchy – Participation and Opposition, New Haven and London, Yale University Press.

4.     Duff, A., 2007, Answering for Crime: Responsibility and Liability in the Criminal Law, Oxford, Hart Publishing.

5.     Dworkin, R., 1968, On Not Prosecuting Civil Disobedience, The New York Review of Books.

6.     Dworkin, R., 2008, Is Democracy Possible Here? Principles for a New Political Debate, Princeton, Princeton University Press.

7.     Gandhi, M., 2001, Non-violent Resistance (Satyagraha), Mineola and New York, Dover Publications.

8.     Habermas, J., 1985, Civil Disobedience: Litmus Test for the Democratic Constitutional State, Berkeley Journal of Sociology 30, pp. 95–116.

9.     Laker, T., 1986, Ziviler Ungehorsam. Geschichte – Begriff – Rechtfertigung, Baden-Baden, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft.

10.  Lefkowitz, D., 2007, On a Moral Right to Civil Disobedience, Ethics, Vol. 117, No. 2, pp. 202–233.

11.  Molnar, A., 2002, Rasprava o demokratskoj ustavnoj državi – IV, Građanska neposlušnost, Beograd, Samizdat B92.

12.  Moraro, P., 2018, On (Not) Accepting The Punishment for Civil Disobedience, The Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 68, No. 272, pp. 503–520.

13.  Raz, J., 1979, The Authority of Law, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

14.  Rols, Dž., 1998, Politički liberalizam, Beograd, Filip Višnjić.

15.  Rawls, J., 1999, A Theory of Justice, Harward, Harward University Press.

16.  Sabl, A., 2001, Looking Forward to Justice: Rawlsian Civil Disobedience and Its Non-Rawlsian Lessons, Journal of Political Philosophy, 9, pp. 307–330.

17.  Спаић, Б., 2017, Два поимања правних принципа, Анали Правног факултета у Београду, LXV, 1/2017, стр. 109–130.

18.  Zinn, H., 1991, Law, Justice and Disobedience, Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics and Public Policy, 5, pp. 898–920.

 

PROPISI

 

1.     International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, UN Treaty Series, Vol. 999.

 

 IZVORI SA INTERNETA

 

1.     https://www.paragraf.rs/dnevne-vesti/091221/091221-vest4.html"> style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 24px; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"> lang="X-NONE" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 24px; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;">, 20. 6. 2022.

2.     https://www.slobodnaevropa.org/a/beograd-protest-zakon-o-eksproprijaciji/31574830.html"> style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 24px; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"> lang="X-NONE" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 24px; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;">, 20. 6. 2022.

 

3.     https://www.slobodnaevropa.org/a/srbija-protesti-zakon/31599642.html, 20. 6. 2022.

Published
2023/07/14
Section
Review Paper