Four Graves of Modern Philosophy of Law: Reflection on the Views by Bjarne Melkevik

Introduction. The article is devoted to the consideration of four theses of the famous scientist B. Melkevik. The attitude of researchers to his ideas is polar: from recognition of him as an outstanding thinker to harsh criticism of his views. We will discuss their points of view and present our view on the ideas of this Norwegian-Canadian thinker. The chosen topic has not been the subject of a special analysis.

Methodology and materials. When writing this text, logical methods of analysis and synthesis, methodological methods of doctrinal interpretation of Melkevik’s four key propositions and his work “Philosophy of law in the current of modernity” are used. We also studied the following works by the scholar: “Why is it necessary to study the philosophy of law?”, “Legitimacy and Human rights”, “Marxism and the philosophy of law: Bazukanis as a model”, “Why Individual Freedom and the Autonomy of Law Stand or Fall Together” (co-author — O. Melkevik, “The strong rule of law state: how to resist modern destructive authoritarianism”, “Legal epistemology and already-law”, “Jurgen Habermas and the Theory of communicative action”, “Habermas and Rolls”, etc. We used the works by M. V. Antonov, V. I. Kruss, V. V.Ogleznev, A. V. Polyakov and others. We believe that the information we have allows us to draw certain conclusions.

Research results and their discussion. Four propositions by B. Melkevik are analyzed: to free oneself from the task of dictating the rules of doctrinal creativity; the philosophy of law must free oneself from the trap of statism; it is necessary to take seriously the autonomy of individuals; the philosophy of law must refuse from funding. At the end of the article, conclusions are drawn and the author’s position is formulated.

Conclusions. The main result is that what B. Melkevik calls graves for the modern philosophy of law, we would call risks. His concept is the understanding of law through the communication of individuals, intersubjective relations with their freedom and in compliance with democratic procedures and procedural restrictions. Law according to B. Melkevik is an art applied in practice. Individuals should be the masters of law.

1. Antonov, M. V. (2015) Book review: Bjarne Melkevik. Philosophie du Droit. Volume 2. Quebec: Presses de L’Universite Laval, 2014. 592 p. Izvestiya vuzov. Law studies. No. 6 (323). Pp. 220–229.

2. Antonov, M. V. (2012) Philosophy of law by Bjarne Melkevik. Book review: Bjarne Melkevik. Philosophie du Droit. Quebec Les Presses de L’Universite Laval, 2010. Vol. 1. 649 p. Izvestiya vuzov. Law studies. No. 3. Pp. 260–268.

3. Antonov, V. V., Ogleznev, V. V. (2020) Legal positivism and truth in law. Proceedings of the Institute of State and Law of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Vol. 15. No. 4. Pp. 42–61. DOI: 10.35427/2073-4522-2020-15-4

4. Preface by A. V. Polyakov (2003). The communicative concept of law: issues of theory. Discussion of A. V. Polyakov’s monograph. Faculty of Law of St. Petersburg State University. Pp. 6–18.

5. Kruss, V.I. (2020) Constitutional legal understanding and challenges of instrumental legal epistemology. Bulletin of the Law Faculty, Southern Federal University. Vol. 7. No. 3. Pp. 46–57. DOI: 10.23683/2313- 6138-2020-7-3-7

6. Kruss, V.I. (2021) Constitutional legal understanding vs Bjarne Melkevik and “others”. Russian Law Journal. Vol. 25. No. 11. Pp. 19–35. DOI: 10.12737/jrl.2021.133

7. Melkevik, B. A. (2018) The strong rule of law state: how to resist modern destructive authoritarianism. The Law and State Journal. No. 1-2, pp. 35–42.

8. Melkevik, B. (2010) Why is it necessary to study the philosophy of law? Jurisprudence in search of identity: a collection of articles, translations, and abstracts. Edited by S. N. Kasatkin. Samara humanitarian academy. Pp. 231–241.

9. Melkevik, B. (2008) Philosophy of law in the current of modernity. Translated from French by M. V. Antonov, A. N. Ostroukh. Russian Yearbook of Legal Theory. No. 1. Edited by A. V. Polyakov. University Publishing Consortium “Yuridicheskaya kniga”. Pp. 527–545.

10. Melkevik, B. (2017) Legal epistemology and already-law. Translated from French by V. A. Tokarev. Scientific editor V. Antonov. Buenos Book International. 135 p.

11. Melkevik, В., Melkevik, O. (2017) Why Individual Freedom and the Autonomy of Law Stand or Fall Together. Translated from English by E. G. Samokhina. Law and State. No. 1-2. Pp. 26–34.

12. Polyakov, A. V. (2018) Preface by the scientific editor. J. Habermas and B. Melkevik: a challenge to legal science. Melkevik Bjarn. Jurgen Habermas and the communicative theory of law. Translated from French by E. G. Samokhina. Scientific editor A. V. Polyakov. Alef-Press Publishing House. Pp. 5–9.