The State as a Guarantor of Freedom

The regulation of co-existence is the job of the state. It has a moral obligation to guarantee the freedoms that all people are entitled to through its laws because a single person is too weak to realise, on the one hand, freedom, and on the other hand, safety and order. Spinoza[109] said that it is not the purpose of the state to change reasonable beings into animals or machines “but to do much more to ensure that their spirits and bodies are not endangered and that they can use their resources, that they are free to use their own reason and that they do not fight with anger, hate and deception or become hostile towards one another. The purpose of the state is, in reality, freedom“.The State is not an opponent of freedom rights, but a condition for the realisation of freedom within society. Man steps, as Krüger[110] said, from a natural situation into the State because he cannot claim inherent freedom in a natural situation. Leopold Krug[111] sums up this idea concisely: “the will of a single citizen and therefore the will of an entire nation is: not to give up their freedom to use their property and their power through association with a State, but to protect and conserve it through this social unity“. The better the State manages to fulfil its duty of realising the freedom of its citizens, the closer it comes to the ideal of a free democracy as envisaged by the honourees. Justi[112] wrote in his work on the nature and essence of the State that “the best government is one that approaches natural freedom without abandoning the ultimate purpose of the Republic”. Even Hegel[113] viewed a State in which freedom reigned as the best State.

Also according to Hegel, the state has the task of realising the freedom of individuals. However, for him, the state is "the actuality of concrete freedom"[114]. Freedom is, according to Hegel, realised where the individual is relieved of his voluntary isolation and his general morality is integrated. It is in the State that this morality that finds its concrete form[115]. In this, Hegel sees the most successful manifestation of many individual freedoms. [116] The individual thus owes his freedom to the State. The freedom of the individual is dependent on membership in the State. [117] The substantial unity of the State was "an absolute unmoved end in itself, in which freedom comes into its supreme right, as this final end, the supreme right against the individual, whose highest duty is to be members of the State."[118] This view of Hegel denies the modern conception of the role of fundamental rights as defensive rights against the State. According to Popper,[119] Hegel with his theories has become the foster father of almost all modern ideas of totalitarianism. Albrecht[120] sees in his discussion of Hegel and democracy Hegel's plea for an affirmative relationship of the citizen to his government, which, on the one hand, means standing in continuity with the modern understanding of freedom, and on the other hand, implies the occurrence of a major metamorphosis from free, self-sufficient and autonomous individuals.

Now, if the State has the mandate to secure the freedom of the individual and if he is not considered in the Hegelian sense as being the reality of concrete freedom and if State authority – such as in a liberal democracy – derives, in fact, from the people, then it is not obvious why the State, who should ensure actual freedom – and not grant it – , may suddenly be a danger to freedom and why the conception of fundamental rights as defensive rights against State power is necessary.

If the State limits the freedom of a person with public authority, this usually occurs for the sake of an orderly coexistence of the community. The State must ensure, when it interferes in the area of freedom, that its restrictions are not disproportionate, and that they do not violate the core area of a right to freedom. If the State, its courts and its authorities manage to do this, they prove themselves to be the guardians and protectors of the natural law of freedom. The organs of the state are however always to be thought capable of failing to find the right measure and goal as far restrictive measures are concerned. Humans are inclined to abuse powerful positions. Montesquieu explains this with the sentence: [121] «C’est une expérience éternelle, que tout homme qui a du pouvoir est porté à en abuser». This also means: «Il va jusqu’à ce qu’il trouve des limites». With this, Montesquieu expresses the principle that each power that a human possesses over other humans must be limited. It is upon this that the claim that the freedom of citizens must be assured is based. Fundamental rights take over on this task their role as defensive rights. With its assistance and through the use of the State authorities and courts, a citizen can prevent unfair attacks to his area of freedom that contradict and interfere with the intended purpose his rights. The positivity of the fundamental rights means that they do not lose their pre-state-transpositive character, but actually gain a positive application.

V. Conclusion

Natural law is the measure of positive law, the predetermined regulation for legislation can be used in certain ways to enforce the law. To what extent natural law can be of importance for a jurisdiction depends on the position of the judge and on the possibilities of finding justice. A court is confronted with the natural-law question if the positive law that should be applied to a case clearly lead to a grossly unfair result. In interpreting the fundamental rights provisions, the German Federal Court felt a commitment to natural law. For example, it recognised the transpositive nature of human dignity, the free development of the person, equality before the law and freedom of conscience.[122] In addition to this, the Federal Court accepted marriage and family order as natural law commandments.[123] Also the right of self-government within a historically united nation was founded through natural law[124].

Only by adhering to the natural law will it succeed in helping to gain the universal breakthrough of the recognition of every man as being equipped with a given absolute dignity through the idea of human rights. Along with the reminders in the constitutions and laws, the conscious conditioning of humans and people and education are of importance to this normative conclusion. The basic principle of human rights has not yet experienced in international life its due recognition, because in spite of its anchorages in international conventions, many states refuse to recognise absolute values which detract from the character of their society. The States of the free world are challenged, therefore, in the battle for the "correct" understanding of human rights, to take action, especially as states are now trying to manipulate the liberties biased in their favour and to reject the pre-state character of the fundamental freedoms as metaphysical fantasies. The solution or even non-solution of these human rights issues at international and national levels will crucially depend on whether nations are able to ward off threatening human rights regimes. Only if humans are carried by consciousness in their fight for human rights, that the basic freedom rights are rights which the individual is entitled by virtue of being human, that they embody and guarantee a system of values not at the disposal of the legislature, human rights can be realized worldwide.

Only then human rights will be able to develop at an international level their peacemaking effect and help ensure that the individual also has respect for the freedom of others. If the philosophy of law gives up its search for finality, the law as such will be abolished and thus deprive the people of the foundations of a controlled existence[125].

*

[1] See Kant, Immanuel, Über den Gemeinspruch (edition W. Weischedel), 1974, p. 161.

[2] Zippelius, Reinhold, Rechtsphilosophie, 2003, p. 94.

[3] It is the modern name for a collection of fundamental works in jurisprudence, issued from 529 to 534 by order of Justinian I, Eastern Roman Emperor. It is also referred to as the Code of Justinian.

[4] Florentinus D.1.5.4.

[5] Ulpianus D.1.1.1.4.

[6] Institutiones I.II.2.

[7] Text: Swindler, William (ed.), Sources and Documents of United States Documents, vol. 10, 1979, p. 68.

[8] Text: Sheppard, Furman, The Constitutional Text-Book, 1856, p. 265.

[9] «Les hommes naissent et demeurent libres et égaux en droits». Text: Duverger, Maurice, Constitutions et documents politiques, 6 éd. 1971, p. 9.

[10] Collection of decisions of the Federal Constitutional Court (in German language: Bundesverfassungsgericht) 1, p. 1 et seqq.(18).

[11] See Collection of decisions of the Federal Constitutional Court 3, p. 225 et seqq. (231); 19, p. 206 et seqq. (220); 21, p. 73 et seqq. (83); 24, p. 367 et seqq. (389); 28, p. 243 et seqq. (261); 30, p. 173 et seqq. (193); 34, p. 269 et seqq. (287); 39, p. 1 et seqq. (67). The full German texts of the Federal Constitutional Court's decisions that have been issued since 1 January 1998 are published here: http://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/en/decisions/2003/10. See also Collection of decisions of the Federal Administrative Court(Bundesverwaltungsgericht) 49, p. 202 et seqq. (209); Collection of decisions of the Federal Court of Justice of Germany (Bundesgerichtshof), Criminal Law 4, p. 375 et seqq. (376 et seq.); Collection of decisions of the Federal Court of Justice of Germany (Bundesgerichtshof), Private Law 6, p. 270 et seqq. (275); 9, p. 83 et seqq. (89); 13, p. 265 et seqq. (297 et seq.); 16, p. 350 (353). – See: Linsmayer, Eleonore, Das Naturrecht in der deutschen Rechtsprechung der Nachkriegszeit, Diss. iur. Munich 1973, p. 141 etseqq.; Weinkauff, Hermann, Der Naturrechtsgedanke in der Rechtsprechung des Bundesgerichtshofes, in: Maihofer, Werner (ed.), Naturrecht oder Rechtspositivismus?, 1962, p. 554 et seqq.

[12] Text: Austrian Civil Code (in German: Allgemeines Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch) 118/2002.

[13] See Collection of decisions of the Federal Supreme Court of Switzerland (German: Bundesgericht; French: Tribunal fédéral; Italian: Tribunale federale; Romansh: Tribunal federal) 87 I, p. 114 et seqq. (117); 89 I, p. 92 et seqq. (98); 91 I, p. 480 et seqq. (485 et seq.); 95 I, p. 223 et seqq. (226); 100 Ia, p. 189 et seqq. (193); 101 Ia, p. 148 et seqq. (150); 102 Ia, p. 379 et seqq. (381); 104 Ia, p. 35 et seqq. (40).

[14] Fleiner-Gerster, Thomas, Allgemeine Staatslehre, 2. ed. 1995, p. 111.

[15] Text: Prime Ministry, Directorate General of Press and Information, The Constitution of the Republic of Turkey.

[16] United Republic of Tanzania. The Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania of 1977, http://www.tanzania.go.tz/constitutionf.html.

[17] Text: American Journal of International Law (AJIL), vol. 55, p. 537 et seqq.

[18] Text: Rivista di diritto internazionale, vol. 66, p. 988 et seqq.

[19] Decision of the Conseil Constitutionnel, 26.03.2003.

[20] Decision of the Conseil Constitutionnel, 06.11.1962.

[21] See Oestreich, Gerhard, Geschichte der Menschenrechte und Grundfreiheiten im Umriß, 1968, p. 47 et seqq.; Picht, Georg, Zum geistesgeschichtlichen Hintergrund der Lehre von den Menschenrechten, in: Delbrück, Jost/Ipsen, Knut/Rauschning, Dietrich (ed.), Recht im Dienst des Friedens. Festschrift für Eberhard Menzel, 1975, p. 289 et seqq.

[22] See Verdross, Alfred, Statisches und dynamisches Naturrecht, 1971, p. 9; Schambeck, Herbert, Naturrecht und Verfassungsrecht, in: Mayer-Maly, Dorothea/Simons, Peter, Das Naturrechtsdenken heute und morgen. Gedächtnisschrift für René Marcic, 1983, p. 911 et seqq. (912).

[23] That induces Kelsen (Kelsen, Hans, Was ist Gerechtigkeit? 1953, p. 39) to the conclusion: „Es nimmt infolge dessen nicht wunder, daß die Vertreter von naturrechtlichen Ansätzen zu unterschiedlichen Wertmaßstäben gelangen: ‚Mit den auf einen Trugschluß gegründeten Methoden der Naturrechtslehre kann man eben alles und daher nichts beweisen’.“

[24] Maritain, Jacques, Die Menschenrechte und das natürliche Gesetz, 1951, p. 55 et seq.

[25] Maritain (footnote 24), p. 57.

[26] Böckenförde, Ernst-Wolfgang, Kirchliches Naturrecht und politisches Handeln, in: Böckle, Franz/Böckenförde, Ernst-Wolfgang (ed.), Naturrecht in der Kritik, 1973, p. 99 et seqq.

[27] Würtenberger, Thomas, Wege zum Naturrecht in Deutschland, in: Archiv für Rechts und Sozialphilosophie (ARSP), vol. 38, p. 108 et seq.

[28] See Würtenberger (footnote 27), ARSP, vol. 38, p. 108 et seqq.

[29] The constitutions of the 19th century did not accept inherent rights. The basic rights were consequently only rights conceded by the state of his own free will, which could be deprived at all times.

[30] To the issue whether the state is the source of every law see Cathrein, Viktor, Recht, Naturrecht und positives Recht, 1964, p. 120 et seqq.

[31] See Sorgenicht, Klaus/Weichelt, Wolfgang/Riemann, Tord/Semmler, Hans-Joachim (ed.), Verfassung der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik – Dokumente, Kommentar, vol. 2, 1969, p. 16.

[32] See to the concept of freedom Zippelius (footnote 2), Rechtsphilosophie, p. 170 et seqq. Under the terms of Bluntschli, Johann Caspar, Allgemeines Staatsrecht, 6th ed., 1965, p. 622, the root of freedom lies in the nature of man.

[33] Schmalz, Theodor von, Handbuch der Rechtsphilosophie, 1807, p. 8.

[34] See Henkel, Heinrich, Einführung in die Rechtsphilosophie, 2d ed., 1977, p. 76.

[35] See Marcic, René, Rechtsphilosophie, 1969, p. 268 f.

[36] Marcic (footnote 35), p. 269.

[37] Gornig, Gilbert, Äußerungs- und Informationsfreiheit als Menschenrechte, 1988, p. 9.

[38] See Fleiner-Gerster (footnote 14), p. 64; Oestreich, Gerhard, Die Entwicklung der Menschenrechte und Grundfreiheiten, in: Bettermann, Karl A./Neumann, Franz/Nipperdey, Hans C. (ed.), Grundrechte, vol. 1, half binding 1, 1966, p. 1 et seqq.(10); Rudolf, Walter, Idee und Grundgehalt der Menschenrechte, in: Deutsches Institut für Bildung und Wissen (ed.), Naturrecht, Menschenrechte, Offenbarung, 1968, p. 114 et seqq.

[39] Platon, Protagoras, 337 c, in: Anniversary issue of his works on the occasion of his 2400th birthday, vol. 1, 1974, p. 228.

[40] As cited in Oestreich (footnote 38), in: Bettermann and others, Grundrechte, p. 11; see also Fleiner-Gerster (footnote 14), p. 64.

[41] See Sauter, Johann, Die philosophischen Grundlagen des Naturrechts, 1966, p. 203.

[42] Sophocles, Antigone, Vers 456, in: Sophocles, Tragödien, ed. by Wolfgang Schadewaldt, 1968, p. 85.

[43] Aristoteles, De rhetorica, Über I, cap. 13, in: Aristotelis opera cum Averrois commentariis, vol. II, 1962, p. 22 et seq.

[44] But Aristotle is pleading for slavery. Under his terms human beings are divided in freemen and slaves. He justifies it with intellectual and physical skills, Aristoteles, Politik, Buch 1, 1254b-1255a, in: Politik, ed. by Eugen Rolfes, 1958, p. 8 et seqq.

[45] Cicero, M. Tullius, Librorum de republica sex, liber III, cap. 22, § 39, ed. by C. F. W. Müller, 1849, p. 344.

[46] Seneca, Libri de beneficiis et de Clementia, liber I, cap. 18,2, ed. by Weidmann, 1876, p. 174.

[47] See Kipp, Heinrich, Staatslehre, 2d ed. 1949, p. 213; Sauer, Ernst F., Staatsphilosophie, 1965, p. 181; Ahrens, Heinrich, Naturrecht oder Philosophie des Rechts und des Staates, vol. 2, 1871, p. 57.

[48] See. S. Thomae Aquinatis, Summa theologica, pars l, quaest. 93, Art. VI, vol. l, ed. by Rubeis, Billuart and others, p. 609 et seq.

[49] See Fleiner-Gerster (footnote 14), p. 67.

[50] See S. Thomae Aquinatis (footnote 48), Summa theologica, pars 2/2, quaest. 183, Art. l, vol. 4, p. 287. In his scripture “Über die Herrschaft des Fürsten”, Buch l, chapter l, Ausgewählte Schriften zur Staats- und Wirtschaftslehre des Thomas von Aquino, ed. by Othmar Spann, 1923, p. 14, Thomas differentiates between slaves and freemen, but emphasizes that they are all created by God.

[51] In his scripture „An Princeps pro suo succursu, scilicet guerrae, possit recipere bona ecciesiarum, etiam invito Papa”, cap. 6, in: Guillelmi de Ockham, Opera politica, accuravit J. G. Sikes, vol. 1 1940, p. 251, one can read: „cum libertas naturalis, qua homines natura sunt liberi et non servi, non sit ab universis ablata mortalibus per potestatem gladii materialis.“ See also Ockham, Guillelmi de, An Princeps, cap. 6, vol. 1, p. 252, 253.

[52] See Lübke, Anton, Nikolaus von Kues, 1968, p. 13 et seqq.

[53] Cusa, Nicolai de, De concordantia catholica, liber II, cap. XIV, § 127, in: Nicolai de Cusa, Opera omnia, vol. 14, ed. by Gerhardus Kallen, 1964, p. 126.

[54] Cusa (footnote 53), De concordantia catholica, liber II, cap. XIV, § 127, p. 126.

[55] Suarez, Franciscus, Tractatus de legibus, liber III, cap. l, § l, in: Franciscus Suarez, Opera omnia, tomus 5, ed. by Carolo Berton, 1856, p. 176; see also: cap. 2, § 3, p. 180; cap. 3, § 6, p. 183; Suarez, Franciscus, Defensio fidei catholicae, liber III, cap. 2, § 11, in: Franciscus Suarez, Opera omnia, tomus 24, ed. by Carolo Berton, 1859, p. 209 et seq. Suarez wrote this scripture by order of the Holy See against the conception of James I of England. The book was burnt in London.

[56] See Rommen, Heinrich, Die Staatslehre des Franz Suarez, 1926, p. 175.

[57] See Cassirer, Ernst, Die Philosophie der Aufklärung, 2d ed. 1932, p. 313 et seqq.

[58] See Althusius, Johannes, Politica, 3d ed. 1614, cap. 18, § 18, p. 282.

[59] Grotius, Hugo, Vom Recht des Krieges und des Friedens, book 2, chapter 22, § 11, ed. by Walter Schätzel, 1950, p. 385.

[60] Hobbes, Thomas, Leviathan, chapter 14, ed. by Wilhelm Hennis and Hans Maier, 1966, p. 99; see also chapter 21, p. 163

[61] Hobbes (footnote 50), Leviathan, chapter 14, p. 99.

[62] Hobbes (footnote 50), Leviathan, chapter 13, p. 94 et seqq.(96).

[63] Oestreich (footnote 38), in: Bettermann and others, Grundrechte, p. 31. also Strauss, Leo, Naturrecht und Geschichte, 1955, p. 171.

[64] Locke, John, Zwei Abhandlungen über die Regierung, Buch 2, § 4, ed. by Walter Euchner, 1967, p. 201.

[65] Locke (footnote 54), Zwei Abhandlungen über die Regierung, book 2, § 6, p. 202.

[66] Locke (footnote 54), Zwei Abhandlungen über die Regierung, book 2, § 22, p. 215.

[67] See Coing, Helmut, Grundzüge der Rechtsphilosophie, 4th ed. 1985, p. 35.

[68] Spinoza, Benedictus, Tractatus theologico-politicus, chapter 20, ed. by Günter Gawlick and Friedrich Niewöhner, 1979, p. 602 et seqq.

[69] Pufendorff, Samuel von, Acht Bücher vom Natur- und Völckerrechte, book 3, chapter 2, § 8, p. 587; furthermore book l, chapter 6, § 15, p. 180; Buch 2, chapter l, § 8, p. 259; book 2, chapter 2, § 3, p. 269; § 4, p. 277; book 3, chapter 2, § 8, p. 587.

[70] Pufendorff (footnote 69), Vom Natur- und Völckerrechte, book 3, chapter 2, §§ l, 2, p. 568 et seqq.

[71] Pufendorff (footnote 69), Vom Natur- und Völckerrechte, book 3, chapter 2, § 8, p. 587.

[72] Pufendorff (footnote 69), Vom Natur- und Völckerrechte, book 3, chapter 2, § 8, p. 588.

[73] Pufendorff (footnote 69), Vom Natur- und Völckerrechte, book 2, chapter 2, § l, p. 261 et seqq.

[74] Pufendorff (footnote 69), Vom Natur- und Völckerrechte, book 2, chapter 2, § 11, p. 297 et seqq.; Pufendorff, Samuel von, De officio hominis et civis iuxta legem naturalem libri duo, liber 2, cap. l, §§ l et seqq., in: The Classics of International Law, ed. by James Brown Scott, 1964, p. 89 et seqq.; in this scripture Pufendorff describes in detail the natural state.

[75] Pufendorff´s theses influence North America strongly. John Wise begins in his book “A Vindication of the Government of New England Churches Drawn from Antiquity” the chapter concerning natural law with following words: “I shall consider Man in a state of Natural Being, as a Free-Born Subject under the Crown of Heaven, and owing Homage to none but to God himself.“ Subsequent to this sentence follow almost literally the thoughts of Pufendorff - Wise calls him a “Chief Guide and Spokes-man“- about human dignity, natural equality, and freedom of mankind. See Wise, John, A Vindication of the Government of New England Churches Drawn from Antiquity, 1717, p. 32. In this manner Pufendorf influenced the American Declaration of Human Rights (Welzel, Hans, Die Naturrechtslehre Samuel Pufendorfs, 1958, p. 49 footnote 62 a).

[76] Euchner, Walter, Naturrecht und Politik bei John Locke 1979, p. 17.

[77] Euchner (footnote 76), p. 28.

[78] Leibniz, Gottfried W., Méditation sur la notion commune de la justice, in: Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, Hauptschriften zur Grundlegung der Philosophie, Bd. 2, ed. by Ernst Cassirer, 3d ed. 1966, p. 506 et seqq.(515 et seq.).

[79] Leibniz (footnote 78), Méditation, p. 516.

[80] See Pufendorff (footnote 74), De officio hominis et civis. liber l, cap. 4, p. 24 et seqq.; liber l, cap. 5, p. 31 et seqq.

[81] Thomasius, Christianus, Fundamenta juris naturae et gentium, 4^th ed. 1718, liber l, caput 5, § 11, p. 148; Thomasius, Christianus, Institutiones jurisprudentiae divinae, 7^th ed. 1720, liber l, caput l, § 114, p. 21.

[82] Bachmann, Hanns-M., Die naturrechtliche Staatsrechtslehre Christian Wolffs, 1977, p. 98.

[83] Wolff, Christianus, Jus naturae, pars l, cap. l, § 80, edidit Marcellus Thomannus (vol. 24 der gesammelten Werke von Christian Wolff, II. Abteilung, Lateinische Schriften), 1968, p. 52.

[84] Wolff (footnote 83), Jus naturae, pars l, cap. l, § 80, p. 52.

[85] Wolff, Christian, Grundsätze des Natur- und Völckerrechts, § 76, p. 47; § 834, ed. by Marcel Thomann (vol. 19 der gesammelten Werke, I. Abteilung, Deutsche Schriften), 1980, p. 612; § 835, p. 613 f.

[86] Wolff (footnote 85), Grundsätze des Natur- und Völckerrechts, § 77, p. 47 et seq.; furthermore Wolff (footnote 83), Jus naturae, pars l, cap. l, § 146, p. 88.

[87] Rousseau, Jean-Jacques, Contrat social, livre l, chapitre l, in: Œuvres complètes de J.-J- Rousseau, tome VI, ed. by Dalibou, 1824, p. 4. The book «Contrat social» was burnt in public in Geneva; see Reibstein, Ernst, Volkssouveränität und Freiheitsrechte, vol. II, 1972, p. 202.

[88] Rousseau (footnote 87), Contrat social, livre l, chapitre 4, p. 12.

[89] Kant, Immanuel, Die Metaphysik der Sitten, Metaphysische Anfangsgründe der Rechtslehre, Eintheilung der Rechtslehre B, in: Kant´s Werke, vol. VI, ed. by Königlich Preußische Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1914, p. 237; furthermore Kant, Metaphysik der Sitten, Metaphysische Anfangsgründe der Rechtslehre, Einleitung in die Rechtslehre, § C, p. 230. Kant, Metaphysik der Sitten, Metaphysische Anfangsgründe der Rechtslehre, Einleitung in die Rechtslehre, Das angeborene Recht ist nur ein einziges, p. 237, 238; furthermore: Metaphysik der Sitten, § 47, p. 316.

[90] But Kant restricted the exercise of such liberties only to a few honest citizens. Kant (footnote 89), Metaphysik der Sitten, § 46, p. 314.

[91] Kant (footnote 1), Über den Gemeinspruch, p. 150.

[92] Kant, Immanuel, Die Metaphysik der Sitten (edition W. Weischedel), 1974, p. 464.

[93] Fichte, Johann G., Zurückforderung der Denkfreiheit von den Fürsten Europens, die sie bisher unterdrückten, in: Johann Gottlieb Fichtes sämmtliche Werke, ed. by J. H. Fichte, vol. 6, 1845, p. 11; furthermore. Fichte, Johann G., Beitrag zur Berichtigung der Urtheile des Publicums über die französische Revolution, book l, chapter l, in: Johann Gottlieb Fichte´s sämmtliche Werke, ed. by J. H. Fichte, vol. 6, 1845, p. 37 et seqq.(117); book l, chapter 5, p. 233.

[94] Fichte (footnote 93), Zurückforderung der Denkfreiheit, p. 12.

[95] In his later works Fichte accepts only positive law: „Es giebt keinen Stand der Urrechte und keine Urrechte des Menschen. Wirklich hat er nur in der Gemeinschaft mit Anderen Rechte, wie er denn ... überhaupt nur in der Gemeinschaft mit Anderen gedacht werden kann." Ein Urrecht sei daher eine bloße Fiktion, aber sie müsse „zum Behuf der Wissenschaft, nothwendig gemacht werden.“

[96] See Ahrens, Heinrich, Menschenrechte, in: Bluntschli, J. C./Brater, K., Deutsches Staatswörterbuch, vol. 6, 1861, p. 602; Rotteck, Carl von, Freiheit, in: Rotteck, Carl von/Welcker, Carl, Staats-Lexikon der Staatswissenschaften, vol. 6, headword „Freiheit“, p. 60 et seqq.(62 et seq.); Pfizer, P., in: Rotteck, Carl von/Welcker, Carl, Staats-Lexikon der Staatswissenschaften, vol. 15, 1843, headword „Urrechte oder unveräußerliche Rechte“, p. 610 et seqq.; furthermore Hugo, Gustav, Lehrbuch des Naturrechts, 1819, p. 77.

[97] See Albrecht, Reinhardt, Hegel und die Demokratie, 1978, p. 40 et seqq.

[98] Hegel, Georg W. F., Die Vernunft in der Geschichte, in: Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Vorlesungen über die Philosophie der Weltgeschichte, vol. I, ed. by Johannes Hoffmeister, 5^th ed. 1968, p. 55.

[99] Hegel, Georg W. F., Enzyklopädie der philosophischen Wissenschaften im Grundrisse, § 248, ed. by Friedrich Nicolin and Otto Pögeler, 6^th ed. 1959, p. 201.

[100] Aristoteles, Politik, book 1, 1253 a, in: Aristoteles, Politik, ed. by Eugen Rolfes, 1958, p. 4.

[101] Thomas von Aquin, Über die Herrschaft der Fürsten, book 1, chapter 1, in: Ausgewählte Schriften zur Staats- und Wirtschaftslehre des Thomas von Aquino, ed. by Othmar Spann, 1923, p. 10 et seq.; Marsilius von Padua, Der Verteidiger des Friedens (Defensor pacis), part 1, chapter 3, § 3 et seqq., ed. by Ernst Engelberg and Horst Kusch, 1958, vol. 1, p. 33 et seqq.

[102] Suarez (footnote 55), De legibus, liber I, cap. 3, § 20/S. 12; furthermore De legibus, liber III, cap. 1, § 3/S. 176.

[103] Soto, Domingo de, De la justicia y del derecho, libro IV, cuestion 4, articulo 1-2, ed. by Instituto de Estutios politicos, Madrid, tomo segundo 1968, p. 300 et seqq.; libro I, cuestion 1, articulo 3, ed. by Instituto de Estudios politicos, tomo primero 1967, p. 10.

[104] Althusius (footnote 58), Johannes, Politica, cap. 1, §§ 1-4, p. 2 et seq.; §§ 33 et seq., p. 10; Hobbes (footnote 50), Leviathan, chapter 17, p. 131; furthermore Spinoza (footnote 68), Tractatus theologico-politicus, chapter 16, p. 469 et seq.; Pufendorff (footnote 69), Vom Natur- und Völckerrechte, book 7, chapter 1, § 2, p. 421; § 3 p. 425 et seq.; § 4, p. 427.

[105] Locke (Anm. 68), Zwei Abhandlungen über die Regierung, book 2, § 123/S. 283; §§ 124 et seqq./S.283 et seq.; Pufendorff (footnote 69), Vom Natur- und Völckerrechte, book 7, chapter 1, § 7, p. 436 et seq.; book 7 chapter 2, § 1, p. 452 et seq.; furthermore Wise (footnote 75), p. 43. Finally Wolff (footnote 85), Grundsätze des Natur- und Völckerrechts, § 835, p. 613 et seq.; Wolff (footnote 83), Jus naturae, pars 8, §§ 1-3, p. 1 et seqq.; Heydenreich, Karl Heinrich, System des Naturrechts, part 2, 1795, p. 201 et seq.

[106] Vgl. Kant (footnote 92), Metaphysik der Sitten, § 44, p. 312.

[107] Vgl. Kant (footnote 92), Metaphysik der Sitten, § 44, p. 312. Furthermore: Justi, Johann Heinrich Gottlob, Natur und Wesen der Staaten, 1771, p. 13 et seqq.

[108] Kant (footnote 92), Metaphysik der Sitten, Einleitung in die Rechtslehre, § C, p. 230. Critical: Hegel, Georg W. F., Vorlesungen über Rechtsphilosophie, 1818-1831, vol. 2, § 29, ed. by Karl H. Ilting, 1974, p. 170; vol. 3, § 33, p. 175 et seqq.

[109] Spinoza (footnote 68), Tractatus theologico-politicus, chapter 20, p. 605.

[110] See Krüger, Herbert, Allgemeine Staatslehre, 2d ed., 1966, p. 530.

[111] Krug, Leopold, Abriß der Staatsökonomie oder Staatswirtschaftslehre, 1808, p. 10.

[112] Justi (footnote 107), p. 40.

[113] Hegel (footnote 108), Vorlesungen über Rechtsphilosophie, vol. 2, § 260, p. 701.

[114] Hegel (footnote 108), Vorlesungen über Rechtsphilosophie, vol. 2, § 260, p. 701; furthermore: Hegel Georg W. F., Grundlinien der Philosophie des Rechts, § 258, in: Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Sämtliche Werke, vol. 7, ed. by Hermann Glockner, 4^th ed. 1964, p. 333 et seq.; § 260, p. 337 et seq.

[115] See Bülow, Friedrich, G. W. Fr. Hegel, Recht, Staat, Geschichte, 6^th ed., 1964, p. 57.

[116] See Albrecht (footnote 97), p. 188.

[117] See also Albrecht (footnote 97), p. 58 et seq.

[118] Hegel (footnote 114), Grundlinien der Philosophie des Rechts, § 258, p. 329.

[119] Popper, Karl Raimund, The Open Society and Its Enemies, vol. II, 5^th edition, 1966, p. 62 et seqq.

[120] Albrecht (footnote 97), p. 60.

[121] Montesquieu, Charles de, De l’esprit des lois, tome premier, livre XI, chapitre IV, p. 168 et seq.

[122] Collection of decisions of the Federal Court of Justice of Germany (Bundesgerichtshof), Criminal Law 4, p. 376 et seq.; 5, p. 333 f.; Collection of decisions of the Federal Court of Justice of Germany (Bundesgerichtshof), Private Law 6, p. 275; 11, Anhang 64; 13, p. 297 et seq.; 13, p. 334 et seqq.; 16, p. 353.

[123] Collection of decisions of the Federal Court of Justice of Germany (Bundesgerichtshof), Criminal Law 6, p. 46 et seqq.; Collection of decisions of the Federal Court of Justice of Germany (Bundesgerichtshof), Private Law 11, attachment p. 34 et seqq.

[124] Collection of decisions of the Federal Court of Justice of Germany (Bundesgerichtshof), Private Law 13, p. 265 et seqq.

[125] “The current denial of natural law does not lead to nihilism, no, it is coinciding with nihilism.“: Strauss, Leo, Naturrecht und Geschichte, 1989, p. 5.

Date: 2015-02-16; view: 889