Føllesdal, Andreas: Om sivil ulydighet i Finnmark – NRK. In: https://www.nrk.no/finnmark/varsler-sivil-ulydighet-ved-gruveapning-i-finnmark-1.13286324, 2016. (Type: Journal Article | Tags: Debate)@article{RN50528, |
Føllesdal, Andreas: Fryktar milde gåver får ein høg pris. In: Uniforum.no, 2016. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: Debate)@article{RN50374,– Dei store gjevarane må ikkje leggja føringar på politikken til institusjonen dei gir pengar til, meiner professor Andreas Føllesdal ved forskingssenteret PluriCourts på Det juridiske fakultetet. |
Ulfstein, Geir: The European Court of Human Rights and national courts: a constitutional relationship?. In: Arnardóttir, Oddný Mjöll; Buyse, Antoine (Ed.): Shifting Centres of Gravity in Human Rights Protection, pp. 46-56, Routledge, London, 2016. (Type: Book Chapter | Tags: Human Rights)@inbook{RN50637, |
Follesdal, Andreas; Tsereteli, Nino: The margin of appreciation in Europe and beyond. In: The International Journal of Human Rights, vol. 20, no. 8, pp. 1055-1057, 2016. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: European Court of Human Rights, Human Rights, International courts, Margin of Appreciation, Publications)@article{RN50636,Is the margin of appreciation doctrine of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) a promising model of deference by a regional human rights court towards democratic states? Or does this doctrine amount to an abdication by such courts from their proper tasks of protecting human rights against violations by states? This special section contributes to the ongoing scholarly debate about the margin of appreciation doctrine, originally developed by the ECtHR. It also explores the emergence of similar doctrines of deference in human rights adjudication outside Europe. The four articles also raise issues relevant for a broader debate about legitimacy and effectiveness of international courts. The authors cover a number of courts, well-established as well as relatively young ones, operating in different legal and political contexts. It allows reflecting on common as well as courtspecific reasons for exercising or avoiding deference. |
Follesdal, Andreas: Subsidiarity to the Rescue for the European Courts? Resolving tensions between the Margin of Appreciation and Human Rights Protection. In: Heidemann, Dietmar; Stoppenbrink, Katja (Ed.): Join, or Die – Philosophical Foundations of Federalism, pp. 251-272, de Gruyter, Berlin, 2016. (Type: Book Chapter | Abstract | Links | Tags: EU – European Union, European Court of Human Rights, Federalism, Human Rights, Margin of Appreciation, Publications, Subsidiarity)@inbook{RN50196,Protests against how the European Court of Human Rights manages the dilemma between protecting human rights and respecting sovereignty led to Protocol 15, which includes references to ‘subsidiarity and a ‘margin of appreciation’ in the Preamble to the European Convention on Human Rights. The article argues that a ‘Principle of Subsidiarity’ can alleviate some of the challenges posed by the margin of appreciation doctrine, in particular that it sacrifices human rights protection on the altar of respect for state sovereignty. Section 1 presents the Margin of appreciation doctrine and some criticism raised against it, section 2 sketches versions of the principle of subsidiarity relevant for this discussion. Section 3 seeks to bring subsidiarity to bear on the question of which authority the ECtHR should enjoy within a multi-level European legal order, and in particular why it should grant states a certain margin of appreciation. Section 4 considers how these arguments concerning a margin of appreciation applies to the European Union—leaving the many other aspects of accession aside. |
Follesdal, Andreas: Subsidiarity and international human rights courts: respecting self-governance and protecting human rights – or neither?. In: Law and Contemporary Problems, vol. 79, no. 2, pp. 147-163, 2016. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: European Court of Human Rights, Human Rights, International courts, Margin of Appreciation, Publications, Subsidiarity)@article{RN50076,Several regional and international courts (ICs) and treaty bodies are empowered to review whether a state’s legislation and policies are consistent with the human-rights conventions it has signed. This article considers how subsidiarity may be brought to bear on the challenges the ECtHR and the IACtHR face. The article focuses on two politically salient, normative questions. First, should states— even well-functioning democracies—subject themselves to ICs with the authority to interpret and adjudicate alleged violations of relevant human-rights treaties? Second, is it is consistent with their mission of protecting human rights that ICs grant the states some discretion, that is, a “margin of appreciation,” or does such discretion nullify the human-rights protection the ICs were established to provide? The discussion of these ICs lends support to several of the assumptions concerning subsidiarity outlined in this issue’s introduction. |
Follesdal, Andreas: Squaring the Circle at the Battle at Brighton: Is the War between protecting human rights or respecting sovereignty over, or has it just begun?. In: Arnardóttir, Oddný Mjöll; Buyse, Antoine (Ed.): Shifting Centres of Gravity in Human Rights Protection: Rethinking Relations between the ECHR, EU, and National Legal Orders, pp. 189-204, Routledge, London, 2016. (Type: Book Chapter | Abstract | Links | Tags: European Consensus, European Court of Human Rights, Human Rights, Margin of Appreciation, Publications, Subsidiarity)@inbook{RN50034,How should the European Court of Human Rights best ‘balance’ respect for the sovereignty of states with protection of the human rights of their citizens? The Court’s theory of subsidiarity must inform its margin of appreciation doctrine when Protocol 15 includes these two concepts in the Preamble of the European Convention on Human Rights. Issues for the Court and for researchers include aspects the doctrine of the margin of appreciation: the proportionality test and the ‘European consensus’; and a more justifiable conception of subsidiarity. |
Follesdal, Andreas: Implications of contested multilateralism for global constitutionalism. In: Global Constitutionalism, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 297-308, 2016. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: )@article{RN50261,The term ‘global constitutionalism’ has been used in various ways, all of which may be appropriate for different purposes. The first sections therefore specify some salient features of that term and of ‘constitutional pluralism’ – before turning to three implications of Morse and Keohane’s claims about ‘contested multilateralism’ (CM) for global constitutionalism, including new forms of constitutional pluralism. The focus is primarily on aspects of CM regarded as a mode of constitutional change, considering what to make of such a form of ‘extra-constitutional’ procedure. Research challenges for political science, law and normative political theory are identified. Challenges by CM to the stability of international law are argued to be overdrawn. Of greater concern is that CM lends itself to piecemeal adjustments rather than reforms with an eye to the systemic effects. However, these worries must be tempered by the non-ideal nature of the present legal structure which should make us wary of imposing normative standards drawn from settings where institutions are fully just and generally complied with. |
Follesdal, Andreas: Building democracy at the bar: The European Court of Human Rights as an agent of transitional cosmopolitanism. In: Transnational Legal Theory, no. special issue, ed. Claudio Corradetti, pp. 95-113, 2016. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: Democratic theory, European Consensus, European Court of Human Rights, Human Rights, Publications)@article{RN50171,How, if at all, does the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) promote more just states which vary greatly in their democratic credentials? The article considers the ECtHR and its practices from the perspective of ‘non-ideal theory,’ namely how it helps states become more stable and just, and more compliant with the human rights norms of the European Convention on Human Rights. The article first sketches what is meant by ‘non-ideal theory,’ then considers aspects of the Council of Europe and the ECtHR which promote transitions toward more just member states. The ECtHR’s practices suffer from at least two weaknesses in this regard: it assumes with insufficient argument that standards appropriate for ‘ideal theory’ conditions of full compliance also should apply to states that suffer from wide ranging noncompliance, or from unjust institutions. Secondly, the Court relies on an ‘emerging European consensus’ with insufficient empirical and normative justification. |
Føllesdal, Andreas; Ulfstein, Geir: Oppfølging om den europeiske menneskerettighetsdomstol og privat eiendomsrett – Svar til Hans Ebbing. In: Klassekampen 29. mai, 2015. (Type: Journal Article | Links | Tags: Debate)@article{RN50101, |
Føllesdal, Andreas; Ulfstein, Geir: Klassekampens støtte til Cameron. In: Klassekampen 22. mai, pp. 16-17, 2015. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: Debate)@article{RN50097,Felles fiender skaper overraskende vennskap. Klassekampen ved nyhetssjef Mimir Kristjansson mfavner David Camerons valgseier i Storbritannia fordi han deler avisens skepsis mot Den europeiske menneskerettighetsdomstolen (EMD). Da er det leit at begges kritikk er skivebom. EMD har mindre makt enn kritikerne hevder, og har verken dømt Storbritannia eller Norge for det Kristjansson påstår. |
Føllesdal, Andreas; Fauchald, Ole Kristian: Mye riktig, mest irrelevant. In: Dagens næringsliv, 2015. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: Debate)@article{RN50136,Europaparlamentariker Christofer Fjellner har mye rett i det han skriver om internasjonale investeringsavtaler og -tribunaler (DN 27.6), men det meste er irrelevant for TTIP mellom EU og USA. … Frihandelsavtalen kan også indirekte endre styrkeforholdet mellom myndigheter og selskaper ved at selskapene kan true med tvisteløsning når interessene deres nedprioriteres. Eksempler kan være endringer av kommuneplaner, strengere krav til forurensende utslipp, kriseberedskap eller arbeidstakerrettigheter, eller skatteskjerpelser. Fjellner har rett i at den sterkestes rett ikke bør gjelde i internasjonal handel. Investeringsbeskyttelse kan være en del av både løsningen og problemet. |
Føllesdal, Andreas: Å tillate borgere dobbelt statsborgerskap truer ikke norske interesser. In: Aftenposten, 2015. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: Debate)@article{RN49993,Det norske forbudet mot dobbelt statsborgerskap hadde tre edle hensikter: å fremme lojalitet til staten, å integrere utlendinger i Norge, og å unngå praktiske ulemper. Men forbudslinjen er trippel feilslått. Risikoen for lojalitetskonflikter er ikke reell, og forbudet fremmer heller ikke integrering. Derfor er det på tide å ta debatten med forkjemperne for forbudet. Hva er så spesielt med Norge og norske verdier og tradisjoner, at de vil skape uholdbare konflikter for norske borgere med dobbelt statsborgerskap? |
Follesdal, Andreas: Making Sovereign Finance and Human Rights work. In: Politics and International Relations – University of Oxford Podcasts, 2015. (Type: Journal Article | Links | Tags: Debate, Human Rights)@article{RN51008, |
Follesdal, Andreas; Muniz-Fraticelli, Victor: The Principle of Subsidiarity as a constitutional principle in the EU and Canada. In: Les Ateliers de l’Éthique/The Ethics Forum, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 89-206, 2015. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: Human Rights, Publications, Subsidiarity)@article{RN49342,A Principle of Subsidiarity regulates the allocation and/or use of authority within a political order where authority is dispersed between a centre and various sub-units. Section one sketches the role of such principle of subsidiarity in the EU, and some of its significance in Canada. Section 2 presents some conceptions of subsidiarity that indicate the range of alternatives. Section 3 considers some areas where such conceptions might add value to constitutional and political deliberations in Canada. Section 4 concludes with some reminders of crucial contested issues not fully resolved by appeals to subsidiarity alone, exemplified by the protection of human rights. |
Follesdal, Andreas: Social Primary Goods. In: Mandle, Jon; Reidy, David (Ed.): The Cambridge Rawls Lexicon, pp. 643-647, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2015. (Type: Book Chapter | Abstract | Links | Tags: Gender, John Rawls, Publications)@inbook{RN49151,Rawls’ theory of justice concerns the scope of required equalities and permitted inequalities engendered by the basic social structure (BS) of a society. this subject requires an index of benefits and burdens that allows publicly accessible interpersonal comparisons of citizens’ well-being, in the relevant sense, among representative members of various social groups. Rawls’ answer is to focus on how the basic structure of society distributes Social primary goods. The entry discusses this account. |
Follesdal, Andreas: Machiavelli at 500: From Cynic to Vigilant Supporter of International Law. In: Ratio Juris, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 242-51, 2015. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: International courts, Publications)@article{RN50023,Machiavelli’s 500 year old treatise The Prince laid out central features of the realist tradition in international relations. His premises led him to question the likelihood of efficacious and stable international law and international courts, a scepticism that has present day proponents. Machiavelli’s reluctance was due to a combination of features of human nature and a focus on anarchic features of the relations among states. The article challenges these assumptions and implications: other interpretations of human nature are closer to Machiavelli’s text, and the current relations among states are significantly different. The revised assumptions should render Machiavelli’s followers more optimistic about international law and international courts. |
Follesdal, Andreas: International Human Rights Courts: Beyond a State of Nature – Foreword. In: Ajevski, Marjan (Ed.): Fragmentation in International Human Rights Law: Beyond Conflicts of Laws, pp. xi-xviii, Routledge, London, 2015. (Type: Book Chapter | Abstract | Links | Tags: Human Rights)@inbook{RN50083,The subject of this fascinating volume is the fragmentation of international and regional human rights courts and treaty bodies (ICs), that is, tensions among courts which all address the same functional area, often bringing apparently similar norms to bear. The rights of concern here are widely regarded as belonging to the core of human rights: freedom of expression, right to privacy, freedom of assembly, and freedom of association. What are we to make of the conflicts that occur not only among such rights and other norms of international law – ranging from trade to the environment – but conflicts among the various human rights courts empower to adjudicate such rights – which courts and rights often conflict? |
Follesdal, Andreas: Curb, Channel and Coordinate: The Constitutionalisation of International Courts and Tribunals. In: Baere, Geert De; Wouters, Jan (Ed.): The Contribution of International and Supranational Courts to the Rule of Law, pp. 355-369, Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, 2015. (Type: Book Chapter | Abstract | Links | Tags: EU – European Union, Human Rights, International courts, Publications, Subsidiarity)@inbook{RN50186,From the vantage point of normative political philosophy the preceding chapters in this volume offer several lessons and further research questions of how to assess and promote the legitimacy of these ICs. The following comments identify some of these. Several proposals amount to measures of constitutionalisation of ICs. Section I identifies some of the hitherto understudied arenas where the authors remind us that the perceived legitimacy of the ICs matters if they are to secure their various objectives. Section II addresses one central standard of legitimacy: the content of the concept of the Rule of Law, which remains contested both as an objective of ICs, and as a requirement on their operation. I stipulate that two central underlying values justify several if not all rule of law norms: non-domination and stable legitimate expectations. Respect for human rights is a further substantive value which many but not all contributors include in the concept. I then consider two main challenges to the legitimacy of ICs from rule of law standards. One is the possible fragmentation and the legal uncertainty that may ensue. Section III thus summarizes the chapters’ insights about the alleged fragmentation wrought by so many ICs. Section IV considers some further challenges to the objectives and performance of ICs by these rule of law standards. Their multiple objectives require that the judges and arbitrators enjoy a wide berth of discretion in interpretation and adjudication – which raise the risk that states and individuals become subject to domination by the ICs themselves. Individuals may end up not living under the rule of law but under the rule of international lawyers. The following two sections gather several possible strands of responses to these fears. Section V elaborates how the power of ICs is constrained by their complex interrelationship with domestic authorities. Some such interdependence may be assessed by a further popular standard of legitimacy in addition to the rule of law, namely subsidiarity. This concept is often invoked in international law, explicitly so for the European Union4 and in debates concerning the European Convention on Human Rights.5 The section explores how several features of the authority of ICs presented by the authors may be explained and perhaps assessed by some standard of subsidiarity, to reduce the risks wrought by the ICs themselves. Appeals to subsidiarity may not so much lay issues to rest as stimulate more structured and systematic arguments concerning the legitimacy of ICs. Section VI considers several ways to regulate the discretion of the ICs to reduce the risks of fragmentation and domination, garnered from the contributions of this volume. Increased legitimacy of international courts requires perspectives and measures of constitutionalisation: Promote rule of law standards by better checks on the international courts, and channel and coordinate them better. |
Ajevski, Marjan: Fragmentation in International Human Rights Law: Beyond Conflicts of Laws. Routledge, London, 2015. (Type: Book | Abstract | Links | Tags: Human Rights)@book{RN50234,The subject of this fascinating volume is the fragmentation of international and regional human rights courts and treaty bodies (ICs), that is, tensions among courts which all address the same functional area, often bringing apparently similar norms to bear. The rights of concern here are widely regarded as belonging to the core of human rights: freedom of expression, right to privacy, freedom of assembly, and freedom of association. What are we to make of the conflicts that occur not only among such rights and other norms of international law – ranging from trade to the environment – but conflicts among the various human rights courts empower to adjudicate such rights – which courts and rights often conflict? |
Follesdal, Andreas: Subsidiarity and the global order. In: Zimmermann, Augusto; Evans, Michelle (Ed.): Global Perspectives on Subsidiarity, pp. 207-220, Springer, Dordrecht, 2014. (Type: Book Chapter | Abstract | Links | Tags: EU – European Union, European Court of Human Rights, Human Rights, Publications, Subsidiarity)@inbook{RN55344,Subsidiarity has been proposed as an answer to the challenges of globalization and global governance. This chapter addresses some of the strengths and weaknesses of such a principle of subsidiarity for questions of how to allocate and use authority at regional and global levels. The chapter criticizes the ‘state centric’ versions of subsidiarity often appealed to for such global settings. In particular, there are several challenges wrought by states that fail to respect their citizens’ human rights, variously interpreted. More defensible versions of subsidiarity do not provide normative legitimacy to the state centric aspects of the global order. Section 1 sketches some of the remarkably different conceptions of subsidiarity as a background to the usages in the European Union, the Catholic Church and as it allegedly appears in international law. The different versions drastically reduce or enlarge the scope of member unit authority. Section 2 considers some implications for the legitimate allocation of authority in our global order which includes many states that routinely violate their citizens’ fundamental human rights. The function of the European Court of Human Rights offers a helpful contrast. |
Føllesdal, Andreas: Stige til stjernene – om forslagene fra UiO strategiske råd. In: Uniforum, 2014. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: Debate)@article{RN49930,Strategi 2020 har relevante målsettinger, men de er for generelle og uprioriterte .. SFF-ene har mange erfaringer og konkrete forslag.. |
Føllesdal, Andreas: Om håndteringen av prorektors avgang. In: Uniforum, 2014. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: Debate)@article{RN49900,…– Det er leit å se hvordan denne saken som er trist i seg selv, er håndtert kommunikasjonsmessig i etterkant, sier han… |
Føllesdal, Andreas: Etikken står på spill. In: Dagens næringsliv, pp. 4, 2014. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: Debate)@article{RN49876,Ti års bidrag fra Norge til en mer forsvarlig verdensorden står på spill. Et strategiråd nedsatt av Finansdepartementet har anbefalt å legge denne uttrekksmekanismen til Norges Bank. Men å la sentralbanken passe investeringsetikken blir å la bukken passe havresekken: Etiske hensyn blir amputert, underordnet avkastningkravet, og skjult. |
Follesdal, Andreas: On Norway’s sovereign wealth fund – a response to Armstrong. 2014. (Type: Unpublished | Abstract | Links | Tags: Debate, Public policy, Publications, SRI – Socially responsible investing)@unpublished{RN49826,Armstrong argues convincingly that Norway should share some of the money stemming from the sale of oil that currently accumulates in its SWF by paying a global tax on that income. This conclusion is, on the one hand, not exhaustive of the requirements of global justice and, on the other, somewhat hasty… |
Follesdal, Andreas: The EU’s lack of shared interests will continue to inhibit the creation of genuine democratic culture. 2014. (Type: Miscellaneous | Abstract | Links | Tags: Debate, EU – European Union, Public policy)@misc{RN49994,How can the EU survive in a post crisis world, given the asymmetry of its decision-making apparatus? Andreas Follesdal argues that this, along with other issues that beset the aimed democratisation of European institutions, hinders the creation of a real culture of democratic accountability and legitimacy. |
Follesdal, Andreas: Engagement, divestment, or both? Conflicts and interactions: The case of the Norwegian Pension Fund. In: Bohoslavsky, Juan Pablo; Cernic, Jernej Letnar (Ed.): Sovereign Financing, pp. 323-336, Hart, Oxford, 2014. (Type: Book Chapter | Abstract | Links | Tags: Human Rights, Public policy, Publications, SRI – Socially responsible investing)@inbook{RN49321,The Norwegian Government Pension Fund is often regarded as the largest sovereign wealth fund in the world. The Fund merits international attention not only because of its size, but also in terms of its complex mission with regard to responsible investment and the mechanisms it employs in pursuit of this mission. At the same time, the Norwegian Parliament does not want the Fund to contribute to unethical acts or omissions, such as violations of fundamental humanitarian principles, serious violations of human rights, gross corruption or severe environmental damage. It has established two main mechanisms to avoid such complicity. These mechanisms ensure that the Fund is involved in ‘Socially Responsible Investing’ (SRI) of two distinct kinds: An activist approach and a negative approach. The following sections explore these mechanisms and discusses tensions among them, against a historic and current background. |
Ulfstein, Geir; Follesdal, Andreas: The European Court of Human Rights and the Norwegian Supreme Court – Independence and Democratic Control. In: Engstad, Nils Asbjørn; Frøseth, Astrid Lærdal; Tønder, Bård (Ed.): The Independence of Judges, pp. 247-260, Eleven, 2014. (Type: Book Chapter | Abstract | Links | Tags: European Court of Human Rights, Human Rights)@inbook{RN49702,How far the courts should go in testing legislation has been highlighted in Norway in recent years by several cases where the Supreme Court has deemed laws unconstitutional. Critics claim that courts thus interfere with democratic decision-making, whilst protecting neither the rule of law nor vulnerable population groups.2 The empowerment of courts means that the independence and qualifications of the judges become more important. It furthermore adds to ‘legalization’, which increasingly causes popular and political concern. The internationalization of law raises further issues for judicial review. In this article, we discuss review of national law on the basis of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and by the Norwegian Supreme Court. We are concerned both with the possible democratic legitimacy of such review, and other grounds for legitimacy. We finally point to some implications of this internationalization of law for public perceptions of the judges’ functions in society and for their independence – and some implications for the Norwegian selection of judges to the Supreme Court and the ECtHR. |
Maliks, Reidar; Follesdal, Andreas: Kantian theory and human rights. In: Follesdal, Andreas; Maliks, Reidar (Ed.): Kantian theory and human rights, pp. 1-7, Routledge, 2014. (Type: Book Chapter | Abstract | Links | Tags: Human Rights)@inbook{RN49801,It is, perhaps, not by chance that the steep increase in theories of human rights has been matched by a renaissance in studies of Kant’s political philosophy. The essays are animated by the idea that if we get a better grip on Kant’s philosophy of right, we can energize the creative endeavor of developing philosophical theories of human rights, inspired by his particular way of thinking about the relation between rights and the rule of law. Three features characteristic of Kant’s thinking frequently crop up in the following chapters and help explain why so much recent scholarship may indeed properly be called ‘Kantian’. These features concern rights, legitimacy, and institutions. freedom is constituted by the rights and duties that enable individuals to be subject to the rule of law instead of arbitrary power. Second, political and legal authorities that establish human rights through law derive their legitimacy from being capable of justification to individuals. Third, the public institutions at the domestic and the international level are considered part of the same system. The contributions explore these Kantian principles in different directions. |
Føllesdal, Andreas: Hvis det norske forbudet mot dobbelt statsborgerskap er løsningen, hva er da problemet?. In: Langeland, Nils Rune (Ed.): Politisk kompetanse: grunnlovas borgar 1814-2014, pp. 78-87, Pax, Oslo, 2014. (Type: Book Chapter | Abstract | Links | Tags: )@inbook{RN49330,Hva slags kompetanse bør stemmeberettigede borgere ha? Hva bør de kunne, og hva bør de være lojale mot når de skal ha stemmerett til stortingsvalg? Blant reglene som setter disse spørsmålene på spissen, er forbudet mot dobbelt statsborgerskap i statsborgerloven av 2005. Forarbeidene til loven drøfter disse sentrale spørsmålene om politisk kompetanse og trekker flere konsekvenser. Argumentene fremført til forsvar for forbudet holder ikke mål. Det er derfor vanskelig å se hvilke legitime interesser staten har av dette forbudet, ikke minst fordi påståtte ulemper med dobbelt politisk lojalitet er dårlig begrunnet, og fordi forbudet ser ut til å hemme integrering, i strid med målsettingen. |
Føllesdal, Andreas: Del av problemet, og del av løsningen: Den europeiske menneskerettighetsdomstolen og demokratisk selvstyre. In: Baldersheim, Harald; Østerud, Øyvind (Ed.): Det norske demokratiet i det 21. århundre, pp. 80-91, Fagbokforlaget, Oslo, 2014. (Type: Book Chapter | Abstract | Links | Tags: )@inbook{RN49917,For å forstå og vurdere bekymringene for fremveksten av internasjonale domstoler og domstolsliknende organer er det viktig å se hvordan de griper inn i og preger nasjonale domstoler og myndigheter. Bidrar slike domstoler til å undergrave det nasjonale demokratiske selvstyre, og i så fall: hvordan skjer det, og hva skal vi synes om dette? Artikkelen ser på ett av flere viktige områder der disse spørsmålene melder seg, nemlig om og hvordan den europeiske menneskerettighetsdomstolen respekterer nasjonale demokratiske beslutninger der det kan se ut som de bryter med den europeiske menneskerettighetskonvensjon. |
Follesdal, Andreas; Maliks, Reidar: Kantian theory and human rights. Routledge, 2014. (Type: Book | Abstract | Links | Tags: Edited books, Human Rights)@book{RN49725,Human rights and the courts and tribunals that protect them are increasingly part of our moral, legal, and political circumstances. The growing salience of human rights has recently brought the question of their philosophical foundation to the foreground. Theorists of human rights often assume that their ideal can be traced to the philosophy of Immanuel Kant and his view of humans as ends in themselves. Yet, few have attempted to explore exactly how human rights should be understood in a Kantian framework. The scholars in this book have gathered to fill this gap. At the center of Kant’s theory of rights is a view of freedom as independence from domination. The chapters explore the significance of this theory for the nature of human rights, their justification, and the legitimacy of international human rights courts. |
Follesdal, Andreas: Subsidiarity and the global order. In: Zimmermann, Augusto; Evans, Michelle (Ed.): Global Perspectives on Subsidiarity, pp. 207-220, Springer, Dordrecht, 2014. (Type: Book Chapter | Abstract | Links | Tags: European Court of Human Rights, Human Rights)@inbook{RN49328,Subsidiarity has been proposed as an answer to the challenges of globalization and global governance. This chapter addresses some of the strengths and weaknesses of such a principle of subsidiarity for questions of how to allocate and use authority at regional and global levels. The chapter criticizes the ‘state centric’ versions of subsidiarity often appealed to for such global settings. In particular, there are several challenges wrought by states that fail to respect their citizens’ human rights, variously interpreted. More defensible versions of subsidiarity do not provide normative legitimacy to the state centric aspects of the global order. Section 1 sketches some of the remarkably different conceptions of subsidiarity as a background to the usages in the European Union, the Catholic Church and as it allegedly appears in international law. The different versions drastically reduce or enlarge the scope of member unit authority. Section 2 considers some implications for the legitimate allocation of authority in our global order which includes many states that routinely violate their citizens’ fundamental human rights. The function of the European Court of Human Rights offers a helpful contrast. |
Follesdal, Andreas: Okin, Susan. In: Gibbons, Michael; Coole, Diana; Ellis, Elisabeth (Ed.): Encyclopedia of Political Thought, Wiley-Blackwell, 2014, ISBN: 978-1-4051-9129-6. (Type: Book Chapter | Abstract | Links | Tags: Gender, Publications)@inbook{RN49244,Susan Moller Okin, an egalitarian feminist liberal, reconstructed the history of political thought to correct for the absence, exclusion or distortion of women, gendered culture and reproduction. She developed the social contract tradition to secure family and gender central place, highlighted the plight of minority women in multicultural societies, and contributed to women-centred development policies. |
Follesdal, Andreas: Legitimacy Challenges and what to do about them – Accountability and authority of the European Court of Human Rights. In: Proceedings of Conference on the Long-term future of the European Court of Human Rights, pp. 78-85, 2014. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: European Court of Human Rights, Human Rights, Margin of Appreciation)@article{RN49901,For this session on accountability, four concerns about the ECtHR merit mention: – the Court’s backlog of well-founded cases; – allegations of overly dynamic interpretation by power-hungry judges; – criticism that the Court abdicates by granting powerful states a margin of appreciation; – criticism that the Court lacks due deference toward well-functioning democracies. …. |
Follesdal, Andreas: Kant, Human Rights, and Courts. In: Follesdal, Andreas; Maliks, Reidar (Ed.): Kantian theory and human rights, pp. 193-202, Routledge, 2014. (Type: Book Chapter | Abstract | Links | Tags: Human Rights, International courts, Publications)@inbook{RN49802,why we should go back to Kant when we seek to understand human rights as they exist in today’s globalized world. It is a good question: why turn once again to a dead white European man for answers to our own questions? The social and legal setting of his day differed so much from ours that we may well wonder what his thoughts might contribute to our world. .. It is in order to understand the puzzles raised by human rights principles and institutions that the essays in this volume develop thinking that is Kantian, that is, inspired by his particular way of thinking about the relation between rights and the rule of law. The following are some reflections prompted by these contributions. The first section explores the role of theories of human rights law, the second section explores the unit of analysis, whether it should be courts or the global basic structure. Section three asks whether international courts suffer a democratic deficit worth worrying about; section four addresses prescriptions – what institutional mechanisms would suffice for legitimacy; section five asks what should guide the discretion of judges of international courts, while section six suggests some remaining ‘Kantian’ issues to be explored. |
Follesdal, Andreas: John Rawls’ Theory of Justice as Fairness. In: Fløistad, Guttorm (Ed.): Philosophy of Justice, pp. 311-328, Springer, Dordrecht, 2014. (Type: Book Chapter | Abstract | Links | Tags: John Rawls)@inbook{RN49430,When do citizens have a moral duty to obey the government and support the institutions of society? This question is central to political philosophy. One of the 20 century’s main response was John Rawls’ theory of justice, “Justice as fairness”, in the book A Theory of Justice, published 1971. The book Justice as Fairness was an improved and shorter presentation of Rawls’ theory, published 2001 with editorial support by Erin Kelly, one of his former students. …This introduction of Rawls falls into eight parts. After a brief biographical introduction, Part 2 presents the allocation principles he advocated. Part 3 presents Rawls’ conception of society and the individual, as an introduction to the rest of the argument presented in part 4 Section 5 takes up his theory of justification, and part 6 points to three areas where the more recent book Justice as Fairness differs somewhat from A Theory of Justice. Section 7 presents some of the criticisms that have been raised, and section 8 points to some lasting contributions of Rawls’ theory. |
Follesdal, Andreas: Guiding and guarding international judges. In: New York University School of Law Journal of International Law and Politics, vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 793-808, 2014. (Type: Journal Article | Links | Tags: )@article{RN49688, |
Follesdal, Andreas: Global Citizenship. In: Sterri, Aksel Braanen (Ed.): Global Citizen – Challenges and Responsibility in an Interconnected World, pp. 71-82, Sense, Rotterdam, 2014. (Type: Book Chapter | Abstract | Links | Tags: Human Rights)@inbook{RN49722,Our actions and practices increasingly mutually affect others across territorial borders. Since these processes of globalization affect our opportunities and our possible impact, globalization also affects what we ought to do – as ‘global citizens’. The chapter explores some implications for our conceptions of citizenship beyond the state. Individuals should be able to exercise some democratic voting rights and some human rights vis-à-vis governance structures above the nation state under our conditions of globalization. After a brief overview including a historical backdrop, section 2 sketches some components of global citizenship, and section 3 considers several objections to this notion. |
Follesdal, Andreas: Federalism and Human Rights in Nepal’s Constitutional Design: Challenges for the Judiciary. In: Ehlers, Dirk; Glaser, Hennig; Prokati, Kittisak (Ed.): Constitutionalism and good governance: Western and Eastern perspectives, vol. 1, pp. 193-203, Nomos, Baden Baden, 2014. (Type: Book Chapter | Abstract | Links | Tags: Federalism, Human Rights, Nepal, Publications)@inbook{RN49661,The article addresses one of the difficult tasks of the Nepal Judiciary, which it shares in part with the Constituent Assembly: how to interpret the idea and mechanisms of federalism in ways that are faithful to the best interests of the Nepal people. The CA must create the constitution of a democratic, human rights-respecting Nepal republic, in light of how the constitution will in turn be interpreted and applied by the judiciary. The reflections in this article concern four varieties of federal elements, discussing arguments in favor and against each drawn from an interpretation of other states’ experiences. Two of the four are territorial: Constitutional – an entrenched split of powers – and Political: decentralised autonomy. Two are non-territorial: Minority Rights, and Minority Representation in common decision making bodies. Some of these arguments and lessons may be helpful also for Nepal’s challenges, two features of which are especially noteworthy: there are very many different groups that must be accommodated fairly. And members of these groups very often live side by side on the same territory. Human rights protections combined with federal elements of Nepal’s new constitution must serve to prevent future domination, especially by the centres, over these many ethnic groups and castes. The new constitution therefore creates several new tasks and challenges for Nepal’s judiciary, several of which are identified. |
Follesdal, Andreas: Democratic standards in an asymmetric Union. In: Cramme, Olaf; Hobolt, Sara B. (Ed.): Democratic Politics in a European Union under Stress, pp. 199 -216, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2014. (Type: Book Chapter | Abstract | Links | Tags: Democratic theory, EU – European Union, Federalism, Publications)@inbook{RN49578,Throughout the present Eurozone crisis, worries about legitimacy and democracy have been particularly vocal, albeit often conflated, and not always very clear. What are we to make of such concerns, and the proposals brought forward? Discussions about the democratic deficit often target the wrong problems, either because the alleged problems are misinterpreted, or because they are in fact not problems at all. Nevertheless, it remains the case (and notwithstanding the contestability of some of the evidence) that the EU is insufficiently democratically accountable. While some weaknesses may be temporary, others seem to be more entrenched in the constitutional structure of the EU. In particular, we need to reconsider our democratic standards if the scholars who say that we must expect the EU to keep features of an asymmetrical federal order, with differentiated integration, are right. My comments concerning the prospects of a sufficiently legitimate EU are clustered under the rubrics of Symptoms, Diagnoses, Prescriptions, and Prognosis. |
Follesdal, Andreas: Democracy, identity, and European public spheres. In: Risse, Thomas (Ed.): European Public Spheres: Politics is Back, pp. 247-262, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2014. (Type: Book Chapter | Abstract | Links | Tags: Democratic theory, EU – European Union, Publications)@inbook{RN49273,The empirical findings of this volume give evidence of Europeanisation in the form of political contestation about matters European. What is the significance for democracy and for the future European Union, of increased politicization in the sense of contestation in various public spheres among political parties about the European polity and regimes – including the territory and competences of the EU. I suggest that there is a third option, in addition to either unfortunate corrosion and fragmentation of the EU or “normalization” of policy contestation, namely permanent salient contestation about constitutional matters – of which the euro crisis may be only one. |
Follesdal, Andreas: Competing Conceptions of Subsidiarity. In: Fleming, James E.; Levy, Jacob T. (Ed.): Nomos LV: Federalism and Subsidiarity, pp. 214-230, New York University Press, New York, 2014. (Type: Book Chapter | Abstract | Links | Tags: European Court of Human Rights, Federalism, Human Rights, Publications, Subsidiarity)@inbook{RN49271,Appeals to a Principle of Subsidiarity has become popular due to its aspirations to address the allocation or use of authority within a political order, typically those where authority is dispersed between a centre and various member units. However, considerations of subsidiarity will seldom resolve disagreements about the allocation of authority. To illustrate how different conceptions of subsidiarity have profoundly different implications for constitutional and institutional design, the article first consider four different theories before turning to some implications as seen in the discussions about US federalism, debates in Europe about the EU and the European Court of Human Rights, and international law. |
Follesdal, Andreas: A common European identity for European citizenship?. In: German Law Journal, vol. 15, no. 5, pp. 765-775, 2014, (Nivå 1). (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: Federalism, Publications)@article{RN49871,What sort of shared European identity is required for Union citizenship to be part of a sustainable, just European political and legal order? Which substantive values and beliefs should be shared? And is there a need for “unique” values and beliefs, exclusive among those who share citizenship? Section 1 affirms the need for some shared values. Section 2 explores aspects of such a shared identity. Section 3 denies the need for a shared “thick” cultural identity. Likewise, section 4 questions the need for unique values. Finally, section 5 points to several challenges concerning identity and citizenship in a Union with asymmetric federal elements, especially when it is subject to asymmetric shocks. |
Føllesdal, Andreas: Prinsipper og ånd – Grunnlovens og Saugstads. In: Morgenbladet, no. 15. februar, 2013. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: Debate, Human Rights)@article{RN49552,Professor Saugstad har før hevdet at «velferdsmenneskerettigheter» – til utdannelse, helsetjenester og så videre – ikke er ekte menneskerettigheter….Heller enn bare å lete etter Grunnlovens «prinsipper og ånd» hos mennene på Eidsvoll må vi simpelthen ut og argumentere i åpent lende: For eller imot en bestemt forståelse av hva menneskerettigheter er, hvilke de er, og hvem som har dem. Hva mener Saugstad om statsborgerskapet og «folkesuverenitetsprinsippet» som gjør at politiske flyktninger eller skattebetalende utlendinger ikke bør få helsetjenester, utdanning for sine barn, eller stemmerett i lokalvalg i Norge? |
Føllesdal, Andreas: Om samvittighetsfanger – Manning – intervju. In: Vårt Land, pp. 27, 2013. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: Debate)@article{RN49595,Om samvittighetskonflikter: “målet jo er å være lojal mot egen samvittighet, loven og arbeidsgiver – på en og samme tid. – Men konflikter oppstår, og det må være moralsk tillatt å varsle om lovbrudd. Et viktig spørsmål er hvordan man sier ifra. I ekstreme situasjoner er det gode grunner til å tro at en varsling internt ikke vil føre til resultater. Mens følelsesmessig engasjement for saken er viktig for å skape lojalitet, er det også viktig å ha på plass det Føllesdal kaller snubletrådmekanismer. Etikk i krig har vært et viktig diskusjonstema siden andre verdenskrig. – Jeg tror det norske forsvaret har gode tiltak for å reflektere over den absolutte lydighetens grenser. Vi slipper ikke unna egne vurderinger. For å unngå samvittighetskonflikter er det derforveldig viktigå tenke over hva slags jobb man går inn i på forhånd, sier han. |
Føllesdal, Andreas: Mennesker som koster mye – om Prioriteringsutvalget.. [Intervju]. In: Morgenbladet, no. 10. august, 2013. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: Debate)@article{RN49628,…Er det rettferdig at den som har både en uhelbredelig og en helbredelig sykdom ikke skal få hjelp til den siste fordi leveårene han vinner uansett vil ha en lav qaly-verdi? Andreas Føllesdal, professor i filosofi ved Juridisk fakultet ved Universitetet i Oslo, mener nettopp slike spørsmål gjør det vanskelig å prioritere helsekroner etter hvor mange kvalitetsjusterte leveår de gir pasientene: – Dersom for eksempel dialyse til multihandikappede bare forbedrer deres helse marginalt på grunn av funksjonshemmingene, vil de skyves langt bak i prioriteringskøen, sier han…. – Mange psykiske lidelser fanges heller ikke opp så godt. I tillegg er det et problem for qaly at den subjektive opplevelsen av livskvalitet ikke er stabil, sier han. Syke opplever ofte livskvaliteten sin som høyere enn friske som ser sykdommen deres utenfra gjør. Og hvem sine vurderinger skal vi da ta hensyn til?.. – I spørsmålet om hvordan vi skal fordele helsetjenestene, er det ikke opplagt at vi skal maksimere den nytten som er basert på personers opplevde livskvalitet. I stedet bør fokus være på hvilke forbedringer av folks helse som har krav på fellesskapets ressurser, sier Føllesdal. Andreas Føllesdal mener mandatet til Prioriteringsutvalget mangler noen viktige temaer: – For det første er det et politisk valg hvor stor pott av fellesskapsutgiftene som kan brukes til helseutgifter. For det andre er det politikernes ansvar at deler av det offentlige helsevesenet nå dessverre drives sjabert, slik vi ser i kjølvannet av sykehussammenslåingene som faggruppene ved sykehusene advarte mot, sier han. Resultatet er at helsevesenet drives på en måte som gjør økonomien dårligere og behovet for prioritering større enn det hadde trengt å være. Han peker også på at utvalget ikke skal diskutere alternative måter å betale for pasienter på som kunne gitt billigere medisiner. De ser heller ikke på om mer bruk av private helseforetak til «enkle inngrep» kunne ha frigitt ressurser i det offentlige. – Disse fire spørsmåleme er ikke del av mandatet til prioriteringsutvalget, men det er rammer som gjør at vi må prioritere mellom mye mer verdifulle helsetjenester enn vi ellers hadde trengt, sier han. |
Føllesdal, Andreas: Filosofi på agendaen – om politikk, valgkamp og verdier (intervju). In: Mandag morgen, 2013. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: Debate)@article{RN49631,Hvordan vi kan sikre en tillitsvekkende og rettferdig fordeling av goder, når vi samtidig må møte minst fire utfordringer… |
Schaffer, Johan Karlsson; Follesdal, Andreas; Ulfstein, Geir: International human rights and the challenge of legitimacy. In: Follesdal, Andreas; Schaffer, Johan; Ulfstein, Geir (Ed.): The Legitimacy of International Human Rights Regimes, pp. 1-30, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2013. (Type: Book Chapter | Abstract | Links | Tags: Human Rights)@inbook{RN49803,The practices and institutions of international human rights would seem to enjoy, on average, a broad, strong legitimacy in the contemporary world. And yet, on the other hand, international human rights practices increasingly face potentially disabling skepticism and critique, resentment and even resistance…this volume … contributes to an increasingly lively research literature spanning the disciplines of law, philosophy, political science and international relations. This introductory chapter serves, first, to give some examples of the type of political controversies over international human rights regimes that motivate this volume; second, to place the volume in current academic debates about international human rights and about the legitimate authority of international institutions; and thirdly, to outline the topics covered in the individual contributions. .. |
Follesdal, Andreas; Schaffer, Johan; Ulfstein, Geir: The Legitimacy of International Human Rights Regimes: Legal, Political and Philosophical Perspectives. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2013. (Type: Book | Abstract | Links | Tags: Edited books, Human Rights)@book{RN49346,this book brings together prominent scholars in law, political philosophy and international relations in order to address the legitimacy of international human rights regimes as a theoretically challenging and politically salient case of international authority. It provides a unique and thorough overview of the legitimacy problems involved in the global governance of human rights. |
Follesdal, Andreas; Peters, Birgit; Ulfstein, Geir: Introduction. In: Follesdal, Andreas; Peters, Birgit; Ulfstein, Geir (Ed.): Constituting Europe: The European Court of Human Rights in a National, European and Global Context, pp. 1-24, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2013. (Type: Book Chapter | Abstract | Links | Tags: European Court of Human Rights, Human Rights)@inbook{RN49579,This book examines the new institutional settings of the Court. Few contributions have hitherto concentrated on these multiple relationships of the ECtHR…. The book aims to assess the relationship between the Court and the member states, the EU, the UN and the other organs of the Council of Europe, partly by referring to a specific set of normative criteria, and taking into consideration their respective needs and their own institutional functions. It seeks to provide a coherent overview and some more principled answers to the current reform debate and future design of the Court and of its relationship to the national, European and global level. The book’s main areas of consideration and main objectives are outlined in the following sections… |
Follesdal, Andreas; Peters, Birgit; Ulfstein, Geir: Constituting Europe: The European Court of Human Rights in a national, European and global context. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2013. (Type: Book | Abstract | Links | Tags: Edited books, European Court of Human Rights, Human Rights)@book{RN49345,At fifty, the European Court of Human Rights finds itself in a new institutional setting. With the EU joining the European Convention on Human Rights in the near future, and the Court increasingly having to address the responsibility of states in UN-lead military operations, the Court faces important challenges at the national, European and international levels. In light of recent reform discussions, this volume addresses the multi-level relations of the Court by drawing on existing debates, pointing to current deficits and highlighting the need for further improvements. |
Follesdal, Andreas; Peters, Birgit; Ulfstein, Geir: Conclusions. In: Follesdal, Andreas; Peters, Birgit; Ulfstein, Geir (Ed.): Constituting Europe: The European Court of Human Rights in a National, European and Global Context, pp. 389-402, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2013. (Type: Book Chapter | Abstract | Links | Tags: European Court of Human Rights, Human Rights)@inbook{RN49580,…the member states, the organs of the Council of Europe – including the Court itself – the EU and, possibly, the UN, are still seeking to calibrate and develop the ECtHR’s legitimacy within the European sphere of fundamental rights. …. , it is difficult to deny the ECtHR’s constitutional role in its relations with the member states. This is not to say that the ECtHR is formally embedded in the general judicial review structure at the member state levels. Nonetheless, it decides on the compatibility of legislative as well as administrative and judicial acts with the Convention. Pilot judgment cases, in particular, may entail a declaration of incompatibility of particular legal provisions with the Convention … The Court’s Legitimacy….. Development and further solutions … The Future… |
Follesdal, Andreas: Subsidiarity as a Constitutional Principle in International Law. In: Global Constitutionalism, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 37-62, 2013. (Type: Journal Article | Links | Tags: Publications, Subsidiarity)@article{RN49343, |
Follesdal, Andreas: Much ado about Nothing? International Judicial Review of Human Rights in Well Functioning Democracies. In: Follesdal, Andreas; Schaffer, Johan; Ulfstein, Geir (Ed.): The Legitimacy of International Human Rights Regimes, pp. 272-299, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2013. (Type: Book Chapter | Abstract | Links | Tags: European Court of Human Rights, Human Rights)@inbook{RN49403,The chapter addresses some of the tensions between sovereignty, international human rights review and legitimacy, and bring these findings to bear on the proposals for reform of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) that would reduce its authority over national legislatures and judiciaries. The objectives of such review are not obvious, the causes of noncompliance are contested, as is the legality of dynamic treaty interpretation; all of which hamper efforts to assess proposed improvements. Section 1 presents some relevant aspects of the ECtHR. Section 2 reviews some of the recent criticism against the ECtHR practice of judicial review to protect human rights in ‘well-functioning’ democracies, in terms of various forms of legitimacy deficits. It also presents some of the recent proposals for reform of the ECtHR. Section 3 lays out some reasons why such judicial review of majoritarian democratic decision-making may be defensible, also for well functioning democracies. Section 4 responds to some of the criticisms, and presents a partial defence. Some standard objections are not well targeted against the practices of the ECtHR, partly due to the division of responsibility between it and national public bodies, and the different roles of legislators and of judiciaries. Section 5 returns to the proposals presented in section 2. Section 6 concludes by considering some of the important remaining normative challenges, this partial defence notwithstanding. |
Follesdal, Andreas: Much Ado about Nothing? Claims about political appointment to the Norwegian Supreme Court – and what to do – and not to do – about it. In: Tidsskrift for rettsvitenskap, no. 3, pp. 365-371, 2013, (Grendstad). (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: )@article{RN49509,Should recent reports of political appointments of Norwegian Supreme Court judges give rise to concern and reform of the process, e.g. toward more explicitly politicized hearings or vetting of nominees? Renewed attention to the patterns of political and ideological leanings among these judges should be welcome, and some observed patterns seem plausible. Insofar as such patterns can be identified, it may seem misplaced to criticize Grendstad et al for overlooking the differences in procedures for selecting judges and the different judicial cultures, e.g. between the US and Norway. If there are statistically significant correlations, the appropriate response may well be to explore possible mechanisms – different from those in full view in the US. But the recent research findings that allege a politicized appointment process can be improved in at least two ways. I shall argue in section 1 that the evidence Grendstad et al present for such ‘political’ appointments is weak. Section 2 suggests that more dimensions than political right-left merit more attention partly due to the internationalization of the judiciary. In conclusion, I suggest that these comments should not diminish but rather increase the need for further research on the political and other ideological bias of the Norwegian Supreme Court – as of other parts of the domestic, regional and international judiciary. The appointment process and voting patterns of Supreme Court justices merit more public attention, e.g. as argued by present Chief Justice Schei – though not for the reasons claimed by Grendstad et al. |
Follesdal, Andreas: The Legitimacy Deficits of the Human Rights Judiciary: Elements and Implications of a Normative Theory. In: Theoretical Inquiries in Law, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 339-360, 2013. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: Human Rights)@article{RN49341,The Article addresses some of the disagreement concerning the legitimacy of the international human rights judiciary. It lays out some aspects of a theory of legitimacy for the international human rights judiciary that seem relevant to addressing two challenges: First, it is difficult to justify the human rights judiciary by appeal to standard accounts of why states agree to subject themselves to treaties. What is the problem the international human rights judiciary is meant to help solve? Second, the human rights judiciary seems undemocratic and even antidemocratic when it overrules domestic, accountable legislatures. Such international judicial review is therefore sometimes thought to be normatively illegitimate, at least regarding democracies. |
Chavez, Leiry Cornejo; Follesdal, Andreas: Fragile Democracies, Strong Human Rights Courts? Comparing European and Inter-American Cases. In: Nordic Journal of Human Rights, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 471-476, 2013. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: Democratic theory, European Court of Human Rights, Human Rights, Publications)@article{RN49685,Do regional Human Rights Courts strengthen democracy? If so, when and why does this occur: what are the scope conditions and intervening mechanisms that make such courts have positive effects? The articles in this special section address these questions as regards the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR). Their similarities and differences allow several lessons to be drawn about the relationship between such courts and democracy….. |
Follesdal, Andreas: Will the Reform Treaty Combat the Union’s Legitimacy Crisis?. In: Merle, Jean-Christophe (Ed.): Die Legitimität von supranationalen Institutionen der EU, pp. 112-129, LIT-Verlag, Münster, 2012. (Type: Book Chapter | Abstract | Links | Tags: EU – European Union, Federalism, Publications)@inbook{RN48050,The Constitutional Treaty (CT) and the Reform Treaty (RT) does take several valuable steps to ensure that the European Union becomes more trustworthy and comes ‘closer to the people’ – though I register some ambivalence. Section 1 provides some fragments of the history of the European Union, to justify the diagnosis that it needs increased levels of trust and arrangements for trustworthiness among Europeans and their political leaders. Section 2 argues that the European Union has certain federal elements that require four peculiar forms of ‘balancing’. Section 4 discusses the increased need for trust among Europeans. Section 4 addresses the role of the Charter on Fundamental Rights as a trust building mechanism. Sections 5 to 7 address how the CT and the RT contribute or detract from each of these three forms of balancing. The conclusion is that certain elements of the CT and of the RT would help European institutions create and maintain their own support among European citizens and officials. |
Føllesdal, Andreas; Ulfstein, Geir: Domstolens dilemma (kronikk). In: Klassekampen, no. 17. april, pp. 21, 2012. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: Debate)@article{RN49313,Den europeiske menneskerettighetsdomstolen står overfor to hovedutfordringer. Den er for populær blant borgerne, og for lite populær blant enkelte lands myndigheter. På den ene siden står derfor 150 000 saker i kø. Samtidig kritiserer noen land EMD for å blande seg for mye inn i demokratiske beslutningsprosesser. Derfor vil de begrense domstolens makt. Hva skal vi synes om EMDs rolle, og om reformforslagene? … |
Føllesdal, Andreas: Vant prestisjetung kåring. In: Klassekampen, no. 12. september, pp. 24, 2012. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Tags: Debate)@article{RN49411,Vant prestisjetung kåring. Tidsskriftet “Journal of Common Market Studies” har nylig kåret en artikkel av filosofiprofessor Andreas Føllesdal og Simon Hix, professor ved London School of Economics, til den viktigste artikkelen publisert i tidsskriftet i årene 2002-2011. Artikkelen framsatte en kritikk av EUs demokratiske underskudd. “Journal of Common Market Studies” er det ledende for studiet av EUs utvikling og fylte nettopp 50 år. I den forbindelse ble det oppnevnt en jury av fremstående forskere til å plukke ut den viktigste artikkelen i tidsskriftets historie. |
Føllesdal, Andreas: Valgordningen svikter storbyene. In: Aftenposten, no. 8. september, pp. 6, 2012. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: Debate)@article{RN49409,Det norske valgsystemet er konstruert for at problemene i storbyene ikke skal prioriteres, … |
Føllesdal, Andreas: Ustyrlig folkestyre. In: NTB, bl.a. Hamar Arbeiderblad, no. 10. mai, 2012. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: Debate, Human Rights)@article{RN49320,medier og akademikere [må] gjøre jobben sin, lyder innspillet fra filosofiprofessor Andreas Føllesdal ved Norsk senter for menneskerettigheter. De må hjelpe velgerne med å skille skitt og kanel, finne ut hva som er troverdige alternativer. Akademikere og medier må også fortelle velgerne hva de må ofre for å komme på fote igjen. Dette er politikk som er for viktig til å overlate til politikerne alene, ifølge Føllesdal. |
Føllesdal, Andreas: Om betinget lydighet –. 2012. (Type: Miscellaneous | Links | Tags: Debate)@misc{RN49432, |
Føllesdal, Andreas: Nobels fredspris til EU – mot sin hensikt?. In: NRK – Ytring, 2012. (Type: Journal Article | Links | Tags: Debate)@article{RN49421, |
Føllesdal, Andreas: Er internasjonale domstoler utenfor demokratisk kontroll?. In: Uniforum, no. 14. desember, 2012. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: Debate)@article{RN49465,Etter at Berlinmuren fall, har talet på internasjonale domstolar eksplodert. UiO-forskarane Andreas Føllesdal og Geir Ulfstein skal finna ut kvifor dei har oppstått, kva funksjon dei har, kva dei har oppnådd og kva legitimitet dei har. Prosjektet er eitt av fire som er blitt senter for framifrå forsking ved UiO…. |
Føllesdal, Andreas: Egners samfunnskontrakt. In: Klassekampen, no. 12. desember, pp. 12-13, 2012. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: Debate)@article{RN49464,I dag er det 100 år siden Thorbjørn Egner ble født… Hva skal vi nå synes om denne samfunnsidiologien? … verdimangfold og globalisering er faktorer som utfordrer både Egner og sosialdemokratisk tankegods mer generelt… |
Ulfstein, Geir; Føllesdal, Andreas: Den europeiske menneskerettighetsdomstolen og Høyesterett – uavhengighet og demokratisk kontroll. In: Engstad, Nils Asbjørn; Frøseth, Astrid Lærdal; Tønder, Bård (Ed.): Dommernes uavhengighet, pp. 443-461, Fagbokforlaget, Bergen, 2012. (Type: Book Chapter | Abstract | Links | Tags: )@inbook{RN49318,. I denne artikkelen drøfter vi prøvingen av norsk rett i forhold til Den europeiske menneskerettighetskonvensjonen (EMK) ved Den europeiske menneskerettighetsdomstolen (EMD) og av Høyesterett, både ut fra demokratiske legitimitet og mulige andre grunnlag for legitim myndighetsutøvelse. Vi peker til sist på hva denne internasjonaliseringen av retten kan og kanskje bør få å si for den allmenne oppfatningen av dommernes funksjoner i det norske samfunn og deres uavhengighet – og noen konsekvenser for utvelgelsen av dommere til Høyesterett og til internasjonale domstoler og medlemmer av menneskerettslige overvåkingsorganer. |
Follesdal, Andreas: Kata pengantar [Preface]. In: Rizki, Rudi M. (Ed.): Violations of Human Rights by transnational corporations and the effort to hold them accountable, pp. vii-ix, Penerbit PT Fikahati Aneska, Jakarta, 2012. (Type: Book Chapter | Tags: Human Rights)@inbook{RN49391, |
Follesdal, Andreas: Global Distributive Justice? State Boundaries as a Normative Problem. In: Global Constitutionalism, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 261-277, 2012. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: Human Rights)@article{RN49225,Should state borders matter for claims of distributive justice? The article explores, only to reject, the best reasons for an “Anti-Cosmopolitan” position which grants some minimum international obligations, including social and economic human rights. At the same time this Anti-Cosmopolitanism rejects distinctly distributive principles of justice, familiar from discussions of justice among compatriots: There are no further limits on permissible global inequalities. “Anti-Cosmopolitans” do not deny that the tangled web of domestic and international institutions has a massive impact on individuals, their life plans and opportunities, albeit often indirectly and surreptitiously. What they deny is that claims to equality or limits to inequality should apply across state borders. The article explores what it is about states that can justify such a disjunct in the normative claims individuals have against each other. Several arguments about such alleged salient aspects of states and their constitutions are considered, but are found lacking. The main conclusion is to challenge the reasons Anti-Cosmopolitans offer against bringing distributive principles to the “Global Basic Structure.” |
Follesdal, Andreas: Europe’s Raison d’Être: Leadership, Democracy – or both? Reflections on G. de Burca and J. Weiler. In: Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 7-8, 2012. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: Democratic theory, Publications)@article{RN49272,What is at stake when the EU suffers from a legitimacy deficit, and what should be done about it? As always, Gráinne de Búrca and J H H Weiler identify and illuminate central issues of concern. de Búrca adroitly pinpoints a crux of the legitimacy debates in Europe: how to secure sufficient deference to EU decisions by citizens and national authorities. She is surely right to remind us that the EU’s legitimacy neither can nor should be based simply or primarily on democratic process legitimacy. But her pessimism may be premature, and her proposal of the EU as a global actor, whilst attractive, is not yet an obvious part of the solution. …successful resolution of this carefully selected set of problems will not reduce the need for democratic accountability, deliberation and contestation, but rather seems to require more of the same. |
Erman, Eva; Follesdal, Andreas: Multiple Citizenship: Normative Ideals and Institutional Challenges. In: Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 279-302, 2012. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: )@article{RN49123,Institutional suggestions for how to rethink democracy in response to changing state responsibilities and capabilities have been numerous and often mutually incompatible. This suggests that conceptual unclarity still reigns concerning how the normative ideal of democracy as collective self-determination, i.e. ‘rule by the people’, might best be brought to bear in a transnational and global context. The aim in this paper is twofold. First, it analyses some consequences of the tendency to smudge the distinction between democratic theory and moral theories of legitimacy and justice. Second, it develops a conceptual framework that distinguishes between necessary conditions, aspects and aims of democracy. On this basis it specifies three objectives of democracy, some of which may also hold for multilevel governance. It is argued that there are in principle at least three reasons to value democratic institutions: they are intrinsically justified to the extent that they distribute fair shares of political influence over decision-making; they are instrumentally justified to the extent that they secure several of our other best interests, one of which is our interest in non-domination; and finally, they are also instrumentally justified insofar as they secure the just distribution of other goods. The aim of this framework is not to develop a specific theory of multilevel governance but to point at important distinctions to be made and normative criteria to be specified. The intention is to take the debate forward by noting some of the issues that any satisfactory account must address. The framework lays out the grounds for analysing the institutional challenges facing legitimate multilevel governance through what is speculatively called ‘multiple citizenship’, understood in explorative terms, opening the door for the manifold roles that citizens could and ought to play in multilevel governance, not only as democratic agents, but also as agents of democracy and agents of justice. |
Føllesdal, Dagfinn; Føllesdal, Andreas: Nedleggelse av Forskningsfondet?. In: Klassekampen, no. 21. oktober, 2011. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: Debate)@article{RN49181,Tora Aasland gir i Aftenposten 14. oktober en begrunnelse for å legge ned Forskningsfondet som er så tynn at hun knapt kan tro på den selv. Man kunne gjette at SV er blitt overkjørt av finansministeren og regjeringskolleger fra andre partier. Men denne unnskyldningen faller bort når også hennes partifelle Aksel Hagen, medlem av KUF-komiteen på Stortinget, karakteriserer nedleggelsen som en ”kjærkommen avvikling” (Klassekampen 9. oktober)….Dersom Forskningsfondet blir nedlagt, vil det bli vanskelig for fremtidige regjeringer å begynne å bygge opp et slikt fond på nytt, fordi de vil vite at rød-grønne regjeringer vil inndra det de legger til side. … |
Føllesdal, Andreas: Utfordringer for naturretten (til Saugstad). In: Morgenbladet, no. 25. mars, 2011. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: Debate, Human Rights)@article{RN49036,Er sosiale og økonomiske rettigheter menneskerettigheter? Professor Jens Saugstad ønsker å sette velferdsrettighetene i FNs menneskerettighetserklæring på tiltalebenken … Minst fire spørsmål forblir ubesvart, slik jeg ser det:.. |
Føllesdal, Andreas: Unøyaktighetens demagogi?. In: Klassekampen, no. 30. mars, pp. 22, 2011. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: Debate, John Rawls)@article{RN49054,Redaktør Bjørgulv Braanen refererer i ’Ulikhetens filosofi?’ (15. mars) et foredrag av Dag Østerberg om John Rawls på Universitetet i Oslo uten å nevne at mange på møtet påpekte grove feil i Østerbergs fremstilling av Rawls. Hilde Bojer, Tore Wig og Emil Aas Stoltenberg korrigerer noen av feilene i innlegg 23. mars. I forbindelse med at feilene også kommer på trykk i boken Troen på markedet som i går ble utgitt av forlaget Res Publica [29. mars], kan noen flere kommentarer være på sin plass… |
Føllesdal, Andreas: Universitetet mister sin gamle verdi [intervju]. In: Under dusken, no. 1, pp. 20-21, 2011. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: Debate)@article{RN49010,Siden 2003 har Norge fått fire nye universiteter. Framtidens arbeidsgivere vil bry seg mer om hvor du har studert enn karakterene dine…. Intervju med Andreas Føllesdal |
Føllesdal, Andreas: Tvilsomt utspill fra Saugstad. In: Morgenbladet, no. 11. mars, 2011. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: Debate, Human Rights)@article{RN49030,Professor Jens Saugstad …. avviser … at «positive velferdsrettigheter» er ordentlige menneskerettigheter. Dette er rettigheter til goder andre må bidra til å skaffe, som mat, helsetjenester og utdannelse. |
Føllesdal, Andreas: A Theory of Justice 40 år etter – ved Universitetet i Oslo. In: 2011. (Type: Journal Article | Links | Tags: Debate)@article{RN49149, |
Føllesdal, Andreas: Reis ut i jakten på gode doktorgrader!. In: Universitas, 2011. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: Debate)@article{RN49194,Høye skolepenger for doktorgradsstudier ved steder som Harvard fører _ikke_ til sosial skjev rekruttering, og mer internasjonal rekruttering senker ikke den faglige kvaliteten ved UiO. |
Føllesdal, Andreas: Rawls?. In: Klassekampen, no. 30. november, pp. 22, 2011. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: Debate, John Rawls)@article{RN49214,…Vetlesen hevder at Obamas mangel på maktkritikk er ”ideologisk tilrettelagt av USAs ledende politiske filosof de siste tredve årene, John Rawls”. …i Lectures on the History of Political Philosophy (2008) oppsummerer han [Rawls] fem reformer som trenges i USA: å begrense privatfinansiering av politisk valgkamp for å hindre kjøp av politisk makt, sjanselikhet for utdanningsmuligheter, helsetjenester for alle, sikring av arbeidsmuligheter for alle, og likestilling for kvinner. Rawls mente at dette knippet av reformer ville mildne, om ikke fjerne, de verste sidene ved diskriminering og rasisme i USA. Hvordan, for ikke å spørre hvorfor, får Vetlesen dette til bli ideologisk tilrettelegging av Obamas konfliktskyhet og manglende maktkritikk? |
Føllesdal, Andreas: Med menneskerettighetsdomstolane under lupa. In: Uniforum, no. 15. april, 2011. (Type: Journal Article | Links | Tags: Debate)@article{RN49061, |
Føllesdal, Andreas: John Rawls: Frihet eller likhet? Ja takk begge deler!. In: Den vanskelige kjærligheten: En essaysamling om forholdet mellom Norge og USA, Fulbright Alumniforenings 40-årsjubileum, pp. 41-48, Oslo, 2011. (Type: Book Chapter | Abstract | Links | Tags: Debate, John Rawls)@inbook{RN49035,Hordan kan vi mennesker leve i fredelig og rettferdig sameksistens? Filosofen John Rawls’ bok A theory of Justice viser hvordan forskning kan ha innflytelse i internasjonal politikk. I 2011 markerer to 40-årsjubileer at USA har gitt viktige bidrag til debattene om frihet og likhet i hele den vestlige verden. Fulbright Alumni foreningen i Norge ble stiftet i 1971 for å styrke Fulbright-programmets målsetting om å bidra til fred og gjensidig forståelse mellom folk i USA og andre land, gjennom internasjonalt samarbeid om forskning, utdanning og kultur. Senator Fulbright hadde stor tro på at forskning og utdanning kunne påvirke vår politiske virkelighet. Et eksempel på Fulbrights forhåpninger om hvordan forskning kan påvirke politikken finner vi i årets andre 40-årsjubileet. I 1971 utkom en av de viktigste bøkene i politisk filosofi, filosofen John Rawls’ bok A Theory of Justice. Boken var resultatet av 20 års arbeid, blant annet som Fulbrightstipendiat i Oxford i 1952-53. |
Føllesdal, Andreas: Forskningsfondet – leserinnlegg. In: Klassekampen, no. 13. oktober, 2011. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: Debate)@article{RN49174,Regjeringen vil nedlegge forskningsfondet. Det ble opprettet av kirke-, utdannings- og forskningsminister Jon Lilletun (KrF) i 1999 for å sikre ”en langsiktig og stabil løpende finansiering av forskningsvirksomhet”. Fondet har nå 80 milliarder på konto i Norges Bank og er etter hvert blitt en viktig del forskningsfinansieringen i Norge. På grunn av det generelt lave rentenivå vil avkastningen i årene fremover bli gradvis lavere, Regjeringen bruker nå variasjonene i rentenivå som begrunnelse for å føre hele fondet tilbake til statskassen: ”Ein slik situasjon vil etter regjeringas vurdering vere uhaldbar for ein sektor som er spesielt avhengig av langsiktige og føreseielege rammer.” I stedet for å bevilge friske penger eller skyte inn mer i forskningsfondet for å opprettholde avkastningen vil regjeringen tilbake til den gamle ordning, hvor forskningsbevilgningenes størrelse og fordeling fastsettes fritt av den til enhver tid sittende regjering. Gjennom 13 år har skiftende regjeringer bygget opp forskningsfondet. De har fulgt opp Lilletuns visjon om et fond som etter hvert skal bli stort nok til å sikre norsk forskning etter at oljeeventyret tar slutt. En politikers kvalitet viser seg blant annet i hvor godt hun/han ivaretar fremtidige generasjoners tarv. Det er nå opp til opposisjonen å vise hva den står for. Dagfinn Føllesdal og Andreas Føllesdal |
Føllesdal, Andreas: Et siste tilsvar til Rawls. In: Klassekampen, 2011. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: Debate, John Rawls)@article{RN49226,7. desember fortsetter min gode kollega Arne Johan Vetlesen å kritisere filosofen John Rawls, av grunner det er vanskelig å forstå… Rawls’ … ”forskjellsprinsipp” tillater ulik livslønn bare i den grad det er nødvendig for å øke de dårligst stilte livslønn sammenlignet med en helt lik fordeling. Vetlesen tolker dette til at ”en toppsjef som tjener femti ganger mer enn sine arbeidere, innrømmes lønnstillegg” så lenge arbeiderne også får det. Men …. De av Klassekampens lesere som er interessert i tolkninger og kritikk av Rawls bør lese bidragene til Hilde Bojer. Hennes bakgrunn som tidligere nestleder i SV gjør det vanskeligere å avskrive dem med ’argumentet’ at dette er Høyrepolitikk. |
Føllesdal, Andreas: Det rettferdige samfunn – kronikk. In: Dagens næringsliv, 2011. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: Debate, John Rawls)@article{RN49148,I krisetider øker etterspørselen etter helhetssyn om hva slags samfunn vi vil holde oss med. På tilbudssiden dominerer A Theory of Justice, skrevet av Harvard-filosofen John Rawls (1921-2002). 40 år etter utgivelsen preger den fortsatt forskning og politikk i hele verden. Hva er det med dette lange, tørre akademiske verket som fremdeles gjør det nyttig og omstridt – også i Norge?…. |
Boye, Erik; Føllesdal, Andreas: Forskerråd til forskningsrådet. In: Morgenbladet, no. 11. februar, 2011. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: Debate)@article{RN49024,For at det norske demokratiske velferdssamfunnet skal være bærekraftig, må vi holde oss med fremragende forskning og forskningsbasert undervisning. Hvordan bør vi styre forskningen i Norge? For å takle fremtidens utfordringer trenger vi kloke forskningspolitiske rådgivere og dyktige forvaltere av de offentlige forskningsmidlene. I Norge kanaliseres det aller meste av slike midler gjennom Norges forskningsråd (NFR). Nå skal NFR evalueres. Det gir anledning til å gjøre opp status og vurdere veivalg videre. … |
Bojer, Hilde; Føllesdal, Andreas: Rawls og økonomisk likhet. In: Klassekampen, no. 7. april, pp. 14-15, 2011. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: Debate, John Rawls)@article{RN49053,I Klassekampen 2. april gir Dag Østerberg en så forvridd framstilling av filosofen John Rawls’ teorier at den ikke engang kan kalles en karikatur. Det ville være synd om hans versjon ble stående som den gyldige for leserne av Klassekampen. Vi ønsker derfor her å gi en mer korrekt framstilling, og samtidig forklare hvorfor så mange mener det er mye inspirasjon å hente i tankene til Rawls. |
Nystuen, Gro; Follesdal, Andreas; Mestad, Ola: Human Rights, Corporate Complicity and Disinvestment. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2011. (Type: Book | Abstract | Links | Tags: Edited books, Human Rights, Publications, SRI – Socially responsible investing)@book{RN48520,How can businesses and their shareholders avoid moral and legal complicity in human rights violations? … In this volume legal scholars and political philosophers identify and address the intertwined issues of moral and legal complicity in human rights violations by companies and those who invest in them.. Contributors include, in addition to the editors; Simon Chesterman, Christopher Kutz, Urs Gasser, Helene Ingierd, Henrik Syse, Bruno Demeyere and Andrew Clapham |
Nystuen, Gro; Follesdal, Andreas; Mestad, Ola: Introduction. In: Nystuen, Gro; Follesdal, Andreas; Mestad, Ola (Ed.): Human Rights, Corporate Complicity and Disinvestment, pp. 1-15, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2011. (Type: Book Chapter | Abstract | Links | Tags: Human Rights, Publications, SRI – Socially responsible investing)@inbook{RN48530,In the twenty-first century, questions of corporate conduct in relation to human rights have come to the forefront of public attention….Several institutional investors such as pension funds , especially responsible private funds and government funds have established policies and practices to handle issues of corporate involvement which they find unethical…. The discussions of the book lie at the intersection of three important current developments relating to normative frameworks: first, the corporate social responsibility (CSR ) discussion which addresses companies directly rather than the investors’ perspective; second, the ethical, or responsible, investment development; and third, discussions on norms for sovereign wealth funds that are investors of a special breed….It is against this normative background that this book analyses the relationships between investment, companies’ conduct and human rights…. Concepts of complicity in human rights violations are at the core of this book. They are discussed from several philosophical as well as several legal perspectives. The underlying discussion is how to establish norms for assessing corporate conduct and investors’ relationships to such conduct, and how to apply them?… |
Mansbridge, Jane J.; Bohman, James; Chambers, Simone; Estlund, David; Follesdal, Andreas; Fung, Archon; Lafont, Cristina; Bernard, Manin; Marti, José Luis: La place de l’intérêt particulier et le rôle du pouvoir dans la démocratie délibérative (The Place of Self-interest and the Role of Power in Deliberative Democracy). In: Raisons Politiques, vol. 42, pp. 47-82, 2011. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: Democratic theory, Publications)@article{RN48982,Translation of 2010 article in Journal of Political Philosophy. Cet article avance, à contre-courant de toutes les théories délibératives existantes, que les intérêts particuliers doivent être pris en compte dans la délibération démocratique. Deux conditions sont cependant nécessaires afin que l’inclusion des intérêts particuliers dans la délibération apparaisse légitime : l’idéal-régulateur d’absence de pouvoir coercitif et l’encadrement des intérêts particuliers par des principes de justice. Ceci conduit à qualifier de ‘délibératives’ des formes de négociation mettant en jeu des intérêts contradictoires, telles que la négociation intégrative et la négociation ‘parfaitement coopérative’. L’article se conclut en défendant la complémentarité de la délibération et de mécanismes démocratiques agrégatifs et non-délibératifs. Based on ‘The Place of Self-interest and the Role of Power in Deliberative Democracy’ in Journal of Political Philosophy 2010 |
Føllesdal, Andreas: Er internasjonal menneskerettighetsprøving legitim?. In: Nytt norsk tidsskrift, no. 1, pp. 71-80, 2011. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Tags: Human Rights)@article{RN49017,Internasjonale konvensjoner beskytter stadig flere menneskerettigheter. Mange ser dette internasjonale vernet som et stort framskritt. Samtidig spør noen seg om slike konvensjoner og deres organer er normativt legitime….Hvorfor bør også relativt velfungerende demokratiske stater ratifisere menneskerettighetskonvensjoner? Jeg vil ta til orde for en annen forståelse av demokrati enn flertallsdemokrati, nemlig et demokrati med institusjoner som kan bekrefte at myndighetene er vår tillit verdig. Da kan internasjonal menneskerettsprøving fremme oppslutning om demokratiske ordninger som er verd å forsvare framfor å være en trussel. Men et slikt forsvar for internasjonal prøving er ikke uforbeholdent: det stiller klare krav til menneskerettighetsregimenes innhold og virkemåter. |
Follesdal, Andreas; Perlmann, Joel: Can there be a Just Zionism? Does anyone care? On Chaim Gans, A Just Zionism. In: Ethical Perspectives, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 625-32, 2011. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: )@article{RN49122,Like many secular Israelis (and most Israelis are more or less secular), Chaim Gans finds himself questioning today much of what had seemed clear about Zionism a generation ago. But unlike anyone else, Gans has endeavoured to sort out what he can still believe to be just in Zionist thinking in a sustained way… |
Follesdal, Andreas: The principle of subsidiarity as a constitutional principle in international law. In: Jean Monnet Working Paper 12/11, 2011. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: Federalism, Publications, Subsidiarity)@article{RN49138,This paper explores Subsidiarity as a constitutional principle in international law. A principle of subsidiarity regulates how to allocate or use authority within a political or legal order, and holds that the burden of argument lies with attempts to centralize authority. In EU law, a principle of subsidiarity is explicitly part of EU law at least since the Maastricht Treaty. Principles of subsidiarity are also found in the constitutions of many federal states. Some authors have appealed to a principle of subsidiarity in order to defend the legitimacy of several striking features of international law, such as the centrality of state consent, the leeway in assessing state compliance and weak sanctions in its absence. The article presents such defenses of state centric aspects of international/ law by appeals to subsidiarity, and find them wanting. Different interpretations of subsidiarity have strikingly different institutional implications regarding the objectives of the polity, the domain and role of subunits, and the allocation of authority to apply the principle of subsidiarity itself. Five different interpretations are explored, drawn from Althusius, the US Federalists, Pope Leo XIII, and others. The choice among them has drastic implications for the appropriate authority of international law and institutions vs domestic authorities – and thus for what sorts of institutional or constitutional reconfiguration should be pursued. One upshot is that the Principle of Subsidiarity cannot provide normative legitimacy to the state centric aspects of current international law on its own. It stands in need of substantial interpretation, which must be guided by normative considerations. While some versions of subsidiarity may match current practices of public international law, these are more questionable than the accounts that grant states a less central role in a legitimate multi-level legal and political order. If subsidiarity is to serve as a ‘constitutional principle’ for public international law, many crucial aspects of our legal order must be reconsidered – in particular the standing and scope of state sovereignty. |
Follesdal, Andreas: Nepal’s Constitution – Special Issue. International Journal of Minority and Group Rights, 2011. (Type: Book | Links | Tags: Nepal, Publications, Special issues)@book{RN49179, |
Follesdal, Andreas: Nepal’s Constitution Writing Process: Rebuilding the Ship while at Sea. In: International Journal of Minority and Group Rights, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 287-291, 2011. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: Federalism, Nepal, Publications)@article{RN49023,In order to understand the recent political and constitutional events of Nepal, and to discern feasible and fair ways to move forward, it is essential to consider the complex composition, circumstances and potential for conflicts by and among the many groups and minorities that constitute the people of Nepal. The future inclusion of marginalized groups requires the drafters of the constitution to attend closely to various models and mechanisms for managing group claims and conflicts. They include a federal Nepal, various group rights, and a voting system of proportional representation. Closer scrutiny reveals that these demands may be interpreted and institutionalized in several ways consistent with the objectives and needs of the population, especially the desire to prevent domination by a predatory centre, and to bolster local autonomy. To understand and facilitate these developments, the present special issue explores several perspectives and analyses. |
Follesdal, Andreas: The Legitimacy Challenges for New Modes of Governance: Trustworthy Responsiveness. In: Government and Opposition, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 81-100, 2011, (First as 2008 NEWGOV Report DTF/D09 , http://www.eu-newgov.org/database/DELIV/DDTFD09_Legitimacy_Challenges_for_NMG.pdf). (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: EU – European Union, Publications)@article{RN48670,Of particular normative concern are two typical features of NMG: a) the delegation of regulatory activities to independent regulatory authorities at the national and the European level; and b) regulatory networks outside the legislative arenas, with both private and public actors. These features tend to make the NMG less democratically accountable. Yet some hold that NMG can confer legitimacy onto the European Union, especially because they secure ‘output’ more effectively than democratic arrangements, even though they lack any ‘input’ from voters. The present paper challenges these normative claims made on behalf of NMGs: the alleged benefits of NMG may be less than often claimed. And democratic accountability measures are less of a challenge to effectiveness and credibility, properly conceived. |
Follesdal, Andreas: Human Rights Investment Filters: A defense. In: Follesdal, Andreas; Mestad, Ola; Nystuen, Gro (Ed.): Human Rights, Corporate Complicity and Disinvestment, pp. 132-155, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2011. (Type: Book Chapter | Abstract | Links | Tags: Human Rights, Publications, SRI – Socially responsible investing)@inbook{RN48540,Do investors have an obligation to not invest in corporations that contribute to human rights violations? – even when such divestment neither causes changes in the corporations, nor prevents the violations? Is there a justification of divestment that holds up even in the face of general breaches of the norms? Can such a justification avoid reliance on controversial religious views? And are there any grounds to believe that such divestment may be effective against human rights violations, even in the absence of a powerful hegemon that sanctions violations of the norms? The affirmative answers below draw on theories of legitimacy and distributive justice that regard SRI as part of a response to the challenges of globalization. Section 1 frames the issues, drawing on the discussions among Quakers on divesting from the slave trade in the 18th century. Sections 2 and 3 provide a normative defense for some minimal human rights filters on investments under economic globalization. Section 4 addresses several objections. |
Follesdal, Andreas: Föderalismus. In: Hartmann, Martin; Offe, Claus (Ed.): Politische Theorie und Politische Philosophie, pp. 95-98, C.H.Beck, Munich, 2011. (Type: Book Chapter | Abstract | Tags: Federalism, Publications)@inbook{RN48990,(In German) In federal political orders political authority is divided, often constitutionally, between at least two levels so that units at each level have final authority and can be self governing in some issue area. …… |
Follesdal, Andreas: Federalism, Ethnicity and Human Rights in Nepal – Or: Althusius meets Acharya. In: International Journal of Minority and Group Rights, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 335-342, 2011. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: Federalism, Human Rights, Nepal, Public policy, Publications)@article{RN48871,The article addresses one of the difficult tasks of the Nepal Constituent Assembly: how to translate the idea and mechanisms of federalism in ways that are faithful to the best interests of the Nepal people into a constitution of a democratic, human rights-respecting Nepal republic. The reflections concern four varieties of federal elements, discussing arguments in favour and against each drawn from an interpretation of other states’ experiences. Two of the four are territorial: constitutional: an entrenched split of powers, and political: decentralised autonomy. Two are non-territorial: minority rights and minority representation in common decision making bodies. Some of these arguments and lessons may be helpful also for Nepal’s challenges, two features of which are especially noteworthy: there are very many diff erent groups that must be accommodated fairly. And members of these groups very often live side by side on the same territory. Human rights protections combined with federal elements of Nepal’s new Constitution must serve to prevent future domination, especially by the centres, over these many ethnic groups and castes. |
Follesdal, Andreas: The Distributive Justice of a Global Basic Structure: A Category Mistake?. In: Politics, Philosophy and Economics, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 46-65, 2011. (Type: Journal Article | Abstract | Links | Tags: John Rawls)@article{RN48747,The present article explores ‘anti-cosmopolitan’ arguments, that shared institutions above the state, such as there are, are not of a kind that support or give rise to distributive claims beyond securing minimum needs. The upshot is to rebut certain of these ‘anti-cosmopolitann’ arguments. Section 2 asks under which conditions institutions are subject to distributive justice norms. That is, which sound reasons support claims to a relative share of the benefits of institutions that exist and apply to individuals? Such norms may require strict equality, Rawls’ Difference Principle, or other constraints on inequality. Section 2 considers, and rejects, several arguments why existing international institutions are not thought to meet these conditions. |
Public Debate
| : Om sivil ulydighet i Finnmark – NRK. In: https://www.nrk.no/finnmark/varsler-sivil-ulydighet-ved-gruveapning-i-finnmark-1.13286324, 2016. |
| : Fryktar milde gåver får ein høg pris. In: Uniforum.no, 2016. |
| : The European Court of Human Rights and national courts: a constitutional relationship?. In: Arnardóttir, Oddný Mjöll; Buyse, Antoine (Ed.): Shifting Centres of Gravity in Human Rights Protection, pp. 46-56, Routledge, London, 2016. |
| : The margin of appreciation in Europe and beyond. In: The International Journal of Human Rights, vol. 20, no. 8, pp. 1055-1057, 2016. |
| : Subsidiarity to the Rescue for the European Courts? Resolving tensions between the Margin of Appreciation and Human Rights Protection. In: Heidemann, Dietmar; Stoppenbrink, Katja (Ed.): Join, or Die – Philosophical Foundations of Federalism, pp. 251-272, de Gruyter, Berlin, 2016. |
| : Subsidiarity and international human rights courts: respecting self-governance and protecting human rights – or neither?. In: Law and Contemporary Problems, vol. 79, no. 2, pp. 147-163, 2016. |
| : Squaring the Circle at the Battle at Brighton: Is the War between protecting human rights or respecting sovereignty over, or has it just begun?. In: Arnardóttir, Oddný Mjöll; Buyse, Antoine (Ed.): Shifting Centres of Gravity in Human Rights Protection: Rethinking Relations between the ECHR, EU, and National Legal Orders, pp. 189-204, Routledge, London, 2016. |
| : Implications of contested multilateralism for global constitutionalism. In: Global Constitutionalism, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 297-308, 2016. |
| : Building democracy at the bar: The European Court of Human Rights as an agent of transitional cosmopolitanism. In: Transnational Legal Theory, no. special issue, ed. Claudio Corradetti, pp. 95-113, 2016. |
| : Oppfølging om den europeiske menneskerettighetsdomstol og privat eiendomsrett – Svar til Hans Ebbing. In: Klassekampen 29. mai, 2015. |
| : Klassekampens støtte til Cameron. In: Klassekampen 22. mai, pp. 16-17, 2015. |
| : Mye riktig, mest irrelevant. In: Dagens næringsliv, 2015. |
| : Å tillate borgere dobbelt statsborgerskap truer ikke norske interesser. In: Aftenposten, 2015. |
| : Making Sovereign Finance and Human Rights work. In: Politics and International Relations – University of Oxford Podcasts, 2015. |
| : The Principle of Subsidiarity as a constitutional principle in the EU and Canada. In: Les Ateliers de l’Éthique/The Ethics Forum, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 89-206, 2015. |
| : Social Primary Goods. In: Mandle, Jon; Reidy, David (Ed.): The Cambridge Rawls Lexicon, pp. 643-647, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2015. |
| : Machiavelli at 500: From Cynic to Vigilant Supporter of International Law. In: Ratio Juris, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 242-51, 2015. |
| : International Human Rights Courts: Beyond a State of Nature – Foreword. In: Ajevski, Marjan (Ed.): Fragmentation in International Human Rights Law: Beyond Conflicts of Laws, pp. xi-xviii, Routledge, London, 2015. |
| : Curb, Channel and Coordinate: The Constitutionalisation of International Courts and Tribunals. In: Baere, Geert De; Wouters, Jan (Ed.): The Contribution of International and Supranational Courts to the Rule of Law, pp. 355-369, Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, 2015. |
| : Fragmentation in International Human Rights Law: Beyond Conflicts of Laws. Routledge, London, 2015. |
| : Subsidiarity and the global order. In: Zimmermann, Augusto; Evans, Michelle (Ed.): Global Perspectives on Subsidiarity, pp. 207-220, Springer, Dordrecht, 2014. |
| : Stige til stjernene – om forslagene fra UiO strategiske råd. In: Uniforum, 2014. |
| : Om håndteringen av prorektors avgang. In: Uniforum, 2014. |
| : Etikken står på spill. In: Dagens næringsliv, pp. 4, 2014. |
| : On Norway’s sovereign wealth fund – a response to Armstrong. 2014. |
| : The EU’s lack of shared interests will continue to inhibit the creation of genuine democratic culture. 2014. |
| : Engagement, divestment, or both? Conflicts and interactions: The case of the Norwegian Pension Fund. In: Bohoslavsky, Juan Pablo; Cernic, Jernej Letnar (Ed.): Sovereign Financing, pp. 323-336, Hart, Oxford, 2014. |
| : The European Court of Human Rights and the Norwegian Supreme Court – Independence and Democratic Control. In: Engstad, Nils Asbjørn; Frøseth, Astrid Lærdal; Tønder, Bård (Ed.): The Independence of Judges, pp. 247-260, Eleven, 2014. |
| : Kantian theory and human rights. In: Follesdal, Andreas; Maliks, Reidar (Ed.): Kantian theory and human rights, pp. 1-7, Routledge, 2014. |
| : Hvis det norske forbudet mot dobbelt statsborgerskap er løsningen, hva er da problemet?. In: Langeland, Nils Rune (Ed.): Politisk kompetanse: grunnlovas borgar 1814-2014, pp. 78-87, Pax, Oslo, 2014. |
| : Del av problemet, og del av løsningen: Den europeiske menneskerettighetsdomstolen og demokratisk selvstyre. In: Baldersheim, Harald; Østerud, Øyvind (Ed.): Det norske demokratiet i det 21. århundre, pp. 80-91, Fagbokforlaget, Oslo, 2014. |
| : Kantian theory and human rights. Routledge, 2014. |
| : Subsidiarity and the global order. In: Zimmermann, Augusto; Evans, Michelle (Ed.): Global Perspectives on Subsidiarity, pp. 207-220, Springer, Dordrecht, 2014. |
| : Okin, Susan. In: Gibbons, Michael; Coole, Diana; Ellis, Elisabeth (Ed.): Encyclopedia of Political Thought, Wiley-Blackwell, 2014, ISBN: 978-1-4051-9129-6. |
| : Legitimacy Challenges and what to do about them – Accountability and authority of the European Court of Human Rights. In: Proceedings of Conference on the Long-term future of the European Court of Human Rights, pp. 78-85, 2014. |
| : Kant, Human Rights, and Courts. In: Follesdal, Andreas; Maliks, Reidar (Ed.): Kantian theory and human rights, pp. 193-202, Routledge, 2014. |
| : John Rawls’ Theory of Justice as Fairness. In: Fløistad, Guttorm (Ed.): Philosophy of Justice, pp. 311-328, Springer, Dordrecht, 2014. |
| : Guiding and guarding international judges. In: New York University School of Law Journal of International Law and Politics, vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 793-808, 2014. |
| : Global Citizenship. In: Sterri, Aksel Braanen (Ed.): Global Citizen – Challenges and Responsibility in an Interconnected World, pp. 71-82, Sense, Rotterdam, 2014. |
| : Federalism and Human Rights in Nepal’s Constitutional Design: Challenges for the Judiciary. In: Ehlers, Dirk; Glaser, Hennig; Prokati, Kittisak (Ed.): Constitutionalism and good governance: Western and Eastern perspectives, vol. 1, pp. 193-203, Nomos, Baden Baden, 2014. |
| : Democratic standards in an asymmetric Union. In: Cramme, Olaf; Hobolt, Sara B. (Ed.): Democratic Politics in a European Union under Stress, pp. 199 -216, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2014. |
| : Democracy, identity, and European public spheres. In: Risse, Thomas (Ed.): European Public Spheres: Politics is Back, pp. 247-262, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2014. |
| : Competing Conceptions of Subsidiarity. In: Fleming, James E.; Levy, Jacob T. (Ed.): Nomos LV: Federalism and Subsidiarity, pp. 214-230, New York University Press, New York, 2014. |
| : A common European identity for European citizenship?. In: German Law Journal, vol. 15, no. 5, pp. 765-775, 2014, (Nivå 1). |
| : Prinsipper og ånd – Grunnlovens og Saugstads. In: Morgenbladet, no. 15. februar, 2013. |
| : Om samvittighetsfanger – Manning – intervju. In: Vårt Land, pp. 27, 2013. |
| : Mennesker som koster mye – om Prioriteringsutvalget.. [Intervju]. In: Morgenbladet, no. 10. august, 2013. |
| : Filosofi på agendaen – om politikk, valgkamp og verdier (intervju). In: Mandag morgen, 2013. |
| : International human rights and the challenge of legitimacy. In: Follesdal, Andreas; Schaffer, Johan; Ulfstein, Geir (Ed.): The Legitimacy of International Human Rights Regimes, pp. 1-30, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2013. |
| : The Legitimacy of International Human Rights Regimes: Legal, Political and Philosophical Perspectives. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2013. |
| : Introduction. In: Follesdal, Andreas; Peters, Birgit; Ulfstein, Geir (Ed.): Constituting Europe: The European Court of Human Rights in a National, European and Global Context, pp. 1-24, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2013. |
| : Constituting Europe: The European Court of Human Rights in a national, European and global context. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2013. |
| : Conclusions. In: Follesdal, Andreas; Peters, Birgit; Ulfstein, Geir (Ed.): Constituting Europe: The European Court of Human Rights in a National, European and Global Context, pp. 389-402, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2013. |
| : Subsidiarity as a Constitutional Principle in International Law. In: Global Constitutionalism, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 37-62, 2013. |
| : Much ado about Nothing? International Judicial Review of Human Rights in Well Functioning Democracies. In: Follesdal, Andreas; Schaffer, Johan; Ulfstein, Geir (Ed.): The Legitimacy of International Human Rights Regimes, pp. 272-299, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2013. |
| : Much Ado about Nothing? Claims about political appointment to the Norwegian Supreme Court – and what to do – and not to do – about it. In: Tidsskrift for rettsvitenskap, no. 3, pp. 365-371, 2013, (Grendstad). |
| : The Legitimacy Deficits of the Human Rights Judiciary: Elements and Implications of a Normative Theory. In: Theoretical Inquiries in Law, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 339-360, 2013. |
| : Fragile Democracies, Strong Human Rights Courts? Comparing European and Inter-American Cases. In: Nordic Journal of Human Rights, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 471-476, 2013. |
| : Will the Reform Treaty Combat the Union’s Legitimacy Crisis?. In: Merle, Jean-Christophe (Ed.): Die Legitimität von supranationalen Institutionen der EU, pp. 112-129, LIT-Verlag, Münster, 2012. |
| : Domstolens dilemma (kronikk). In: Klassekampen, no. 17. april, pp. 21, 2012. |
| : Vant prestisjetung kåring. In: Klassekampen, no. 12. september, pp. 24, 2012. |
| : Valgordningen svikter storbyene. In: Aftenposten, no. 8. september, pp. 6, 2012. |
| : Ustyrlig folkestyre. In: NTB, bl.a. Hamar Arbeiderblad, no. 10. mai, 2012. |
| : Om betinget lydighet –. 2012. |
| : Nobels fredspris til EU – mot sin hensikt?. In: NRK – Ytring, 2012. |
| : Er internasjonale domstoler utenfor demokratisk kontroll?. In: Uniforum, no. 14. desember, 2012. |
| : Egners samfunnskontrakt. In: Klassekampen, no. 12. desember, pp. 12-13, 2012. |
| : Den europeiske menneskerettighetsdomstolen og Høyesterett – uavhengighet og demokratisk kontroll. In: Engstad, Nils Asbjørn; Frøseth, Astrid Lærdal; Tønder, Bård (Ed.): Dommernes uavhengighet, pp. 443-461, Fagbokforlaget, Bergen, 2012. |
| : Kata pengantar [Preface]. In: Rizki, Rudi M. (Ed.): Violations of Human Rights by transnational corporations and the effort to hold them accountable, pp. vii-ix, Penerbit PT Fikahati Aneska, Jakarta, 2012. |
| : Global Distributive Justice? State Boundaries as a Normative Problem. In: Global Constitutionalism, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 261-277, 2012. |
| : Europe’s Raison d’Être: Leadership, Democracy – or both? Reflections on G. de Burca and J. Weiler. In: Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 7-8, 2012. |
| : Multiple Citizenship: Normative Ideals and Institutional Challenges. In: Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 279-302, 2012. |
| : Nedleggelse av Forskningsfondet?. In: Klassekampen, no. 21. oktober, 2011. |
| : Utfordringer for naturretten (til Saugstad). In: Morgenbladet, no. 25. mars, 2011. |
| : Unøyaktighetens demagogi?. In: Klassekampen, no. 30. mars, pp. 22, 2011. |
| : Universitetet mister sin gamle verdi [intervju]. In: Under dusken, no. 1, pp. 20-21, 2011. |
| : Tvilsomt utspill fra Saugstad. In: Morgenbladet, no. 11. mars, 2011. |
| : A Theory of Justice 40 år etter – ved Universitetet i Oslo. In: 2011. |
| : Reis ut i jakten på gode doktorgrader!. In: Universitas, 2011. |
| : Rawls?. In: Klassekampen, no. 30. november, pp. 22, 2011. |
| : Med menneskerettighetsdomstolane under lupa. In: Uniforum, no. 15. april, 2011. |
| : John Rawls: Frihet eller likhet? Ja takk begge deler!. In: Den vanskelige kjærligheten: En essaysamling om forholdet mellom Norge og USA, Fulbright Alumniforenings 40-årsjubileum, pp. 41-48, Oslo, 2011. |
| : Forskningsfondet – leserinnlegg. In: Klassekampen, no. 13. oktober, 2011. |
| : Et siste tilsvar til Rawls. In: Klassekampen, 2011. |
| : Det rettferdige samfunn – kronikk. In: Dagens næringsliv, 2011. |
| : Forskerråd til forskningsrådet. In: Morgenbladet, no. 11. februar, 2011. |
| : Rawls og økonomisk likhet. In: Klassekampen, no. 7. april, pp. 14-15, 2011. |
| : Human Rights, Corporate Complicity and Disinvestment. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2011. |
| : Introduction. In: Nystuen, Gro; Follesdal, Andreas; Mestad, Ola (Ed.): Human Rights, Corporate Complicity and Disinvestment, pp. 1-15, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2011. |
| : La place de l’intérêt particulier et le rôle du pouvoir dans la démocratie délibérative (The Place of Self-interest and the Role of Power in Deliberative Democracy). In: Raisons Politiques, vol. 42, pp. 47-82, 2011. |
| : Er internasjonal menneskerettighetsprøving legitim?. In: Nytt norsk tidsskrift, no. 1, pp. 71-80, 2011. |
| : Can there be a Just Zionism? Does anyone care? On Chaim Gans, A Just Zionism. In: Ethical Perspectives, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 625-32, 2011. |
| : The principle of subsidiarity as a constitutional principle in international law. In: Jean Monnet Working Paper 12/11, 2011. |
| : Nepal’s Constitution – Special Issue. International Journal of Minority and Group Rights, 2011. |
| : Nepal’s Constitution Writing Process: Rebuilding the Ship while at Sea. In: International Journal of Minority and Group Rights, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 287-291, 2011. |
| : The Legitimacy Challenges for New Modes of Governance: Trustworthy Responsiveness. In: Government and Opposition, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 81-100, 2011, (First as 2008 NEWGOV Report DTF/D09 , http://www.eu-newgov.org/database/DELIV/DDTFD09_Legitimacy_Challenges_for_NMG.pdf). |
| : Human Rights Investment Filters: A defense. In: Follesdal, Andreas; Mestad, Ola; Nystuen, Gro (Ed.): Human Rights, Corporate Complicity and Disinvestment, pp. 132-155, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2011. |
| : Föderalismus. In: Hartmann, Martin; Offe, Claus (Ed.): Politische Theorie und Politische Philosophie, pp. 95-98, C.H.Beck, Munich, 2011. |
| : Federalism, Ethnicity and Human Rights in Nepal – Or: Althusius meets Acharya. In: International Journal of Minority and Group Rights, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 335-342, 2011. |
| : The Distributive Justice of a Global Basic Structure: A Category Mistake?. In: Politics, Philosophy and Economics, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 46-65, 2011. |