Autoridade e conflito político: justificação democrática da normatividade segundo Jeremy Waldron

Abstract

In this thesis I will address the authority of law which is exercised by the State, through institutions and public agents, over the people according to Jeremy Waldron's legal theory. After an introduction that justifies the importance of such theme and points the central hypothesis of this study out, the theoretical context where the New Zealander philosopher’s work is inserted is described in the first chapter. Precisely, it is a conceptual clarification of the author’s legal positivism and normative proposal, once although Waldron’s affiliation to legal positivism, the secession of such philosophical tradition as well as the clash of its adherents in contemporaneity is evident, given the challenge released by Dworkin. In the following chapter, Waldron's argumentative route comes up with a democratic justification of the normativity in the public sphere, starting from a situation called political circumstances. Finally, the last chapter directly discuss the study of authority exercised by the State, where the notion of authority by Joseph Raz was exhibited at first, to which Waldron opposes. In a second moment, his criticism is presented, as well as his proposal for compatibility between facticity and democracy. In the end, I point out a contradiction in Waldron's argument to his notion of authority among public agents, based on a consideration that the author recently proposed on the possibility of adopting weak judicial control of the constitutionality of laws in democratic regimes.