Rule of Law and Political Representation

How do the rule of law and political representation relate to each other? I answer this question, hitherto neglected by rule-of-law scholars, taking my cue from Joseph Raz’s revision of his conception of the rule of law and by relying on a distinction between preferences and interests, which pervades discussions of political representation. I argue that political representatives’ attention to their constituents’ preferences, and not just their interests, is a necessary feature of a conception of representation that expresses a robust allegiance to the rule of law. More specifically, that such allegiance is better honoured when representatives are responsive to preferences warranted by public interests. I offer two groups of rule-of-law reasons for that claim. First, because respect for preferences by representatives facilitates the conditions for the law to be obeyed. Second, respect for those preferences through the justification of the representatives’ collective decisions allows for accountability and for non-arbitrary creation and application of the law. I finish addressing a threefold objection to my reliance on preferences as objects that representatives should consider when making their decisions.

Chile’s New Constitution: What Right to Health?

Chile is a country crossed by economic inequalities. The constitutional process has opened a space to problematize the institutions that reproduce these inequalities. This paper joins into this discussion arguing that a nuanced focus on the right of access to healthcare under international law would fit the future Constitution better. I label this focus ‘nuanced’, in reaction to international law’s limited ability to address justice claims located at the core of Chile’s social and constitutional discontent. I argue that the right to health under international law is unlikely to address the problem of unequal enjoyment of healthcare services. The paper argues that a better approach would be to integrate a solidaristic understanding to this human right. The added value of solidarity translates in a more substantive conceptualization of social rights where they become at the service of the liberty of all. Through a critical discussion about the inception of the right to health under Chile’s current Constitution, the paper shows the limitations of today’s understanding and the underlying reasons for the transformation it proposes.

Administrative Law as a Dual State. Authoritarian Elements of Administrative Law

Scholars have recently shown how in Europe regimes in democratic decay (e.g. Poland, Hungary) take all sorts of measures targeting and marginalizing political opponents. Although they are authoritarian by nature, the measures are cast in a legal form. According to some scholars this kind of authoritarian rule of law can be best understood as a dual state, namely a combination of the normative state (the rule of law) and the prerogative state (the pure—political or arbitrary—will of those in power). Building on these insights, the present paper makes two new observations. First, administrative law is distinctively well suited to cater for the creation of a dual state. By distinctively I mean better than civil and criminal law. In fact, I argue that administrative law constitutes a dual state in and of itself combining normative and prerogative state elements within a single area of law, in ways that cannot be done under civil and criminal law. Second, not only regimes in democratic decay but also liberal democracies make use of the dual state nature of administrative law. The paper illustrates this point with two techniques whereby liberal democracies use administrative law to circumvent or pervert the normal operation of criminal law, namely crimmigration and the alien detention of citizens. My underlying normative point is to draw attention to the inherent authoritarian potential of administrative law.