The article ‘Comments on the approach to human dignity in case law’ deals with some approaches to the interpretation of human dignity by international and constitutional courts including Czech Constitutional Court. It is the wide-ranging and extensive use of human dignity that certainly is a success of the post-war concept of human dignity as a basis for the protection of rights. On the other hand, the universal applicability of human dignity and it being ambivalently used is criticised for leading to vagueness and relativisation of the basic concept of dignity. However, given that the post-war conception is based on human dignity being the grounds for the human rights granted to all people, the universality of human dignity and its extensive use are the typical attributes thereof. The article describes fields of judicial interpretation of human dignity expressing diverse worlds of constitutional values., Helena Hofmannová., and Obsahuje bibliografické odkazy
Vztah mezi principem proporcionality a lidskou důstojností je jednou z nejspornějších otázek debaty o normativní struktuře garance lidské důstojnosti.Dvě konstrukce stojí proti sobě: absolutní a relativní teorie.Podle absolutní teorie je garance lidské důstojnosti normou, jež má za všech okolností přednost před ostatními normami. Proto je vyloučen ospravedlnitelný zásah do lidské důstojnosti. Oproti tomu je test proporcionality nutně spjat s rozlišováním mezi oprávněnými a neoprávněnými zásahy. Absolutní teorie je s tímto pojmovým rámcem neslučitelná. Relativní teorie naopak říká, že otázka, zda byla porušena
lidská důstojnost, je otázkou proporcionality. Poměřování je především formou racionální právní argumentace. Alternativy jsou oproti tomu odkázány na jistý „intuicionismus o lidské důstojnosti“. Argumentace je výrazem racionality, intuicionismus přiznáním iracionality. Proto může být správná pouze relativní konstrukce. and The relation between proportionality analysis and human dignity is one of the most contested questions in the debate about the normative structure of human dignity. Two conceptions stand in opposition: an absolute and a relative conception. According to the absolute conception, the guarantee of human dignity counts as a norm that takes precedence over all other norms in all cases. Taking precedence over all other norms in all cases implies that balancing is precluded. This, in turn, means that each and every interference with human dignity is a violation of human dignity.Thus, justified interference with human dignity becomes impossible. By contrast, proportionality analysis is intrinsically connected to the distinction between justified and unjustified interferences. A proportional interference is justified and is, therefore, constitutional. The opposite applies in the case of disproportional interference. The absolute conception is incompatible with this conceptual framework. For this reason, it is incompatible with proportionality analysis.According to the relative conception, precisely the opposite is true. The relative conception says that the question of whether human dignity is violated is a question of proportionality.With this, the relative conception is not
only compatible with proportionality analysis, it presupposes it.