In this blog post, we will examine the legal principle of legal realism to determine what standards and principles should be used to make judgments when legal rules and legal principles conflict.
Legal realism divides legal norms into legal rules and legal principles. Legal rules have definitive normative content, while legal principles are ideological norms that require the maximum realization of something in a given situation. Legal principles provide the background for understanding the existence and content of legal rules.
Legal rules are legal norms that definitively stipulate the constituent requirements and the resulting legal effects. In other words, when the requirements stipulated by legal norms occur in fact, the corresponding legal effects must occur. The process of interpreting and applying legal rules is carried out through logical operations. This logical operation, commonly referred to as legal syllogism, is considered to be a self-evident inference deduced from two premises. The major premise is the legal norm, and the minor premise is the fact confirmed as the condition for the application of the legal norm. The confirmation of the conditions for application is made through the determination that the facts investigated satisfy the constituent elements of the law. Legal conclusions are derived by applying legal norms to the facts.
Legal rules play an important role in maintaining the consistency of the legal system. The consistency of the legal system provides predictability to citizens and contributes to ensuring legal stability. For example, if the requirements for the formation of a contract and the legal effects thereof are clearly stipulated in contract law, the parties to the contract can clearly understand their rights and obligations and conclude the contract. This enhances the reliability of contracts and facilitates the smooth conduct of economic activities.
If there are conflicting legal rules that stipulate opposing legal effects for the same act, the principle of special law taking precedence or the principle of new law taking precedence shall be applied to declare that only one of the legal rules is valid, or an exception clause shall be established to resolve the conflict. This method of conflict resolution plays an important role in maintaining the unity and stability of the legal system.
Legal principles are legal norms that take the form of maximizing the occurrence of legal effects under given conditions. In other words, legal principles do not determine the legal effects that will occur when the requirements specified by law are met. Legal principles can be applied more flexibly, which helps the legal system adapt to changing social circumstances. Legal principles are used as tools to enable laws to achieve justice and fairness in specific situations.
If legal principles conflict in a specific case, the conflict is resolved through a balancing of interests. Balancing of interests refers to the decision of which of the legal effects arising from conflicting legal principles in a specific case should be applied. Therefore, unlike legal rules, conflicts between legal principles are dealt with in terms of which legal principle has greater weight. One way to measure the weight of conflicting interests is to examine the optimization of interest realization.
In legal realism, the product of balancing interests is considered to be a legal rule. This is because legal norms obtained as a result of balancing interests take the form of legal rules with specific requirements and legal effects that can be applied to specific cases. In this context, legal principles serve as the background basis for understanding the existence and content of legal rules.
Furthermore, legal realism emphasizes the role of judges in the interpretation and application of law. Judges make decisions based on legal principles, taking into consideration the purpose and social values of legal norms. This means that law is not simply a set of rules, but a tool for realizing social justice. For example, legal principles for the protection of fundamental rights encourage judges to guarantee the rights of individuals to the maximum extent possible in specific cases. This is one of the reasons why legal realism emphasizes the human aspect of law.
