Putting Deficient Rechtsstaat on the Research Agenda: Reflections on Diminished Subtypes
Dados Bibliográficos
| AUTOR(ES) | |
|---|---|
| AFILIAÇÃO(ÕES) | 2Institute of Political Science and Social Research, Department of Comparative Politics, University of Wuerzburg, Wittelsbacherplatz 1, 97074 Würzburg, Germany;, Email: [email protected], 1Institute of Political Science and Social Research, Department of Comparative Politics, University of Wuerzburg, Wittelsbacherplatz 1, 97074 Würzburg, Germany;, Email: [email protected] |
| ANO | 2009 |
| TIPO | Artigo |
| PERIÓDICO | Comparative Sociology |
| ISSN | 1569-1322 |
| E-ISSN | 1569-1330 |
| EDITORA | Brill Academic Publishers |
| DOI | 10.1163/156913309x421637 |
| CITAÇÕES | 1 |
| ADICIONADO EM | 2025-08-18 |
| MD5 |
7cfc52d912865067f3b81a2ff3205bad
|
Resumo
This article proposes a typology of diminished subtypes of Rechtsstaat. Building on a historical overview of the different constitutional traditions in the United States, Great Britain, and Germany, an ideal type of Rechtsstaat is identified. This definition provides the foundation for the creation of subtypes, which are structured into two categories. First, four diminished subtypes of Rechtsstaat are defined: inconsistent, arbitrary, partly-implemented, and excluded. Second, three different causes for the deficiencies are identified: lack of capacities (LoC Type), powerful interests supporting alternative rules (PIAR Type), and high acceptance of alternative norm systems (HAAS Type). The latter two types of causes, PIAR and HAAS, are largely ignored in legal reform strategies and yet – according to our approach in this article – they are more prevalent empirically than the first type.