Giulio Fornaroli from INCET and Cristián Rettig published a new article: “Conflicts of Rights and Action-Guidingness” in Ratio Juris. This paper is a part of Making Up for What We Did: From Morality to the Law; From the Present to the Past project.

Abrtract

In this paper, we raise two points. First, any rights-based theory should provide a method by which to guide reasoning in addressing conflicts of rights. The reason, we argue, is that these theories must provide guidance on what should be done. Second, this method must contain two key recommendations: (1) We should try to find a deliberative mechanism through which none of the rights is simply eliminated from the scene; (2) these rights may be balanced against each other to define which right should prevail, but without considering non-rights-interests as if they were rights in the process. These recommendations instantiate two crucial principles that underlie our common intuitions on rights, namely, the principle that rights deserve equal respect and the principle that rights should be taken seriously.

Link to the article

Rettig, C. and Fornaroli, G. (2023), Conflicts of Rights and Action-Guidingness. Ratio Juris. https://doi.org/10.1111/raju.12374