Rhetorical Strategies in Legal Argumentation. Some remarks on the recent decisions of the Portuguese Tribunal Constitucional and the Italian Corte Costituzionale on same-sex marriage

Legal argumentation is usually considered the more formal (or, at least, formalistic) kind of practical argumentation, thanks to the long tradition of “legal syllogism” as its formal instrument, but also to its legal restraint (the formalistic aspect). Yet, in arguments such as those used, for examp...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Giovanni Damele
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: The University of Akureyri 2011-03-01
Series:Nordicum-Mediterraneum
Subjects:
Online Access:http://nome.unak.is/nm-marzo-2012/6-1x/24-articles61/71-rhetorical-strategies-in-legal-argumentation-some-remarks-on-the-recent-decisions-of-the-portuguese-tribunal-constitucional-and-the-italian-corte-costituzionale-on-same-sex-marriage
_version_ 1797332941678837760
author Giovanni Damele
author_facet Giovanni Damele
author_sort Giovanni Damele
collection DOAJ
description Legal argumentation is usually considered the more formal (or, at least, formalistic) kind of practical argumentation, thanks to the long tradition of “legal syllogism” as its formal instrument, but also to its legal restraint (the formalistic aspect). Yet, in arguments such as those used, for example, by high courts in their justifications, we may find not only strict formalism and adherence to the letter of the law, but also the attempt to resolve differences of opinion and conflicts of interest, and perhaps also the rhetorical attempt to persuade the legal community, the legislator or even public opinion of the soundness of the court’s decision. But there could be more than that. I think that contemporary theories of legal argumentation have let aside the idea that the analysis of legal argumentations can show the judges' hidden ideological and political positions by resorting to traditional legal arguments. Just as an example, it may be interesting to analyze the justificatory function of argumentations contained in two decisions taken by two constitutional courts, in Italy and in Portugal, on the same question. Why constitutional courts and not, for example, a court of first instance? Constitutional judges, apparently, do not need to persuade anybody: there is no higher judicial authority, and their interpretation of constitutional text is definitive. For this reason, one can assume that strategic argumentation plays little role in the arguments justifying their verdicts. I hope I can show that this assumption may not, fully, reflect the reality.
first_indexed 2024-03-08T07:55:38Z
format Article
id doaj.art-53245c1cfcab4cd09dfba25f587faa22
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1670-6242
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-08T07:55:38Z
publishDate 2011-03-01
publisher The University of Akureyri
record_format Article
series Nordicum-Mediterraneum
spelling doaj.art-53245c1cfcab4cd09dfba25f587faa222024-02-02T13:42:13ZengThe University of AkureyriNordicum-Mediterraneum1670-62422011-03-0161A2Rhetorical Strategies in Legal Argumentation. Some remarks on the recent decisions of the Portuguese Tribunal Constitucional and the Italian Corte Costituzionale on same-sex marriageGiovanni DameleLegal argumentation is usually considered the more formal (or, at least, formalistic) kind of practical argumentation, thanks to the long tradition of “legal syllogism” as its formal instrument, but also to its legal restraint (the formalistic aspect). Yet, in arguments such as those used, for example, by high courts in their justifications, we may find not only strict formalism and adherence to the letter of the law, but also the attempt to resolve differences of opinion and conflicts of interest, and perhaps also the rhetorical attempt to persuade the legal community, the legislator or even public opinion of the soundness of the court’s decision. But there could be more than that. I think that contemporary theories of legal argumentation have let aside the idea that the analysis of legal argumentations can show the judges' hidden ideological and political positions by resorting to traditional legal arguments. Just as an example, it may be interesting to analyze the justificatory function of argumentations contained in two decisions taken by two constitutional courts, in Italy and in Portugal, on the same question. Why constitutional courts and not, for example, a court of first instance? Constitutional judges, apparently, do not need to persuade anybody: there is no higher judicial authority, and their interpretation of constitutional text is definitive. For this reason, one can assume that strategic argumentation plays little role in the arguments justifying their verdicts. I hope I can show that this assumption may not, fully, reflect the reality.http://nome.unak.is/nm-marzo-2012/6-1x/24-articles61/71-rhetorical-strategies-in-legal-argumentation-some-remarks-on-the-recent-decisions-of-the-portuguese-tribunal-constitucional-and-the-italian-corte-costituzionale-on-same-sex-marriageconstitutional lawItalylegal argumentationPortugalrhetoricsame-sex marriage
spellingShingle Giovanni Damele
Rhetorical Strategies in Legal Argumentation. Some remarks on the recent decisions of the Portuguese Tribunal Constitucional and the Italian Corte Costituzionale on same-sex marriage
Nordicum-Mediterraneum
constitutional law
Italy
legal argumentation
Portugal
rhetoric
same-sex marriage
title Rhetorical Strategies in Legal Argumentation. Some remarks on the recent decisions of the Portuguese Tribunal Constitucional and the Italian Corte Costituzionale on same-sex marriage
title_full Rhetorical Strategies in Legal Argumentation. Some remarks on the recent decisions of the Portuguese Tribunal Constitucional and the Italian Corte Costituzionale on same-sex marriage
title_fullStr Rhetorical Strategies in Legal Argumentation. Some remarks on the recent decisions of the Portuguese Tribunal Constitucional and the Italian Corte Costituzionale on same-sex marriage
title_full_unstemmed Rhetorical Strategies in Legal Argumentation. Some remarks on the recent decisions of the Portuguese Tribunal Constitucional and the Italian Corte Costituzionale on same-sex marriage
title_short Rhetorical Strategies in Legal Argumentation. Some remarks on the recent decisions of the Portuguese Tribunal Constitucional and the Italian Corte Costituzionale on same-sex marriage
title_sort rhetorical strategies in legal argumentation some remarks on the recent decisions of the portuguese tribunal constitucional and the italian corte costituzionale on same sex marriage
topic constitutional law
Italy
legal argumentation
Portugal
rhetoric
same-sex marriage
url http://nome.unak.is/nm-marzo-2012/6-1x/24-articles61/71-rhetorical-strategies-in-legal-argumentation-some-remarks-on-the-recent-decisions-of-the-portuguese-tribunal-constitucional-and-the-italian-corte-costituzionale-on-same-sex-marriage
work_keys_str_mv AT giovannidamele rhetoricalstrategiesinlegalargumentationsomeremarksontherecentdecisionsoftheportuguesetribunalconstitucionalandtheitaliancortecostituzionaleonsamesexmarriage