Russian Law Journal

Advanced search

Kelsen, the New Inverted Pyramid and the Classics of Constitutional Law

Full Text:


The present study overhauls Hans Kelsen’s thesis of the traditional normative pyramid, in order to accommodate the most outstanding doctrinal contributions of the last century to it. For the purpose, the Essay proceeds as follows: (i) the shortcomings of the first version of the pyramid, found in Kelsen’s Pure Theory of Law and on Adolf Merkl’s contributions, are detected; (ii) new key concepts of the Aristotelian-Thomistic metaphysics are introduced, this will allow us to upgrade the theory of the staggered legal system; (iii) unity and order of the legal system are briefly analyzed; (iv) a staggered legal pyramid is redesigned, with a gradual reduction of the juridical space; and finally, (v) the theories of Kelsen, Merkl, and several of the most influential doctrinarians of law (e.g., Jhering, Radbruch, Rorty, Ross, Kelsen, Holmes, Hägerström, Olivecrona, Hart, MacCormick, Dworkin, among others) are tested, to see if their ideas fit in the new theory.

This upgrade of the traditional theory arises from a significant shift in the philosophical basis. The first pyramid was elaborated by Kelsen and Merkl under the tenets of neoKantian metaphysics. On the other hand, the methodology and the basic ideas behind this study are those of the Aristotelian-Thomistic metaphysics. It moves from an idealistic metaphysics to a traditional realistic metaphysics, so neglected in recent centuries. The inverted pyramid theory, formulated here, is the product of many previous works. Many of them have been published in different international journals.

About the Author

Juan Carlos Riofrío
University of the Hemispheres

Professor of Constitutional Law and Theory of Law

Paseo de la Universidad No. 300 y Juan Díaz, Iñaquito Alto, Quito, 170527, Ecuador


1. Araújo A. Solução final do homicida em série no positivismo jurídico de Hans Kelsen, 1 (1) Revista Superior de Justiçia 230 (2011).

2. Balbín R.M. de. La relación jurídica natural (Pamplona: Eunsa, 1985).

3. Bender L. Philosophia Iuris (2nd ed., Roma: Officium Libri Catholici, 1955).

4. Berkmanas T. Schmitt V. (?) Kelsen: The Total State of Exception Posited for the Total Regulation of Life, 3 (2) Baltic Journal of Law & Politics 98 (2010).

5. Bierling E.R. Juristische Prinzipienlehre (TüBingen: Scientia, 1894).

6. Bix B. Kelsen and Normativity Revisited, University of Minnesota Law School, Legal Studies Research Paper 13-27 (2013).

7. Cicero. De inventione, De optimo genere oratorum, Topica (H.M. Hubbell (trans.), Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1949).

8. Colón-Ríos J.I. Kelsen en Nueva Zelanda in Ecos de Kelsen: vida, obra y controversias (G.A. Ramírez Cleves (ed.), Bogotá: Universidad Externado de Colombia, 2012).

9. Duzy E.S. Philosophy of Social Change According to the Principles of Saint Thomas (Washington D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1944).

10. Dworkin R. A Matter of Principle (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1985).

11. Dworkin R. Freedom’s Law (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1996).

12. Ehrlich E. Grundlegung der Soziologies des Rechts (München: Duncker & Humblot, 1913).

13. Errázuriz C.J. La teoría pura del derecho de Hans Kelsen (Pamplona: Eunsa, 1986).

14. Finnis J. Natural Law – Positive LawinSimposio Internazionale Evangelium Vitae e Diritto 96 (Rome: Pontificia Università Della Santa Croce, 1996).

15. Fuller L.L. The Morality of Law (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1964).

16. Hargreaves S. Of Rights & Review: The American, Kelsen, & New Commonwealth Models, 1 Canadian Student Law Review 1 (2006).

17. Hart H.L.A. & Honoré T. Causation in the Law (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1959).

18. Hart H.L.A. Kelsen Visited, 10 (4) UCLA Legal Review 709 (1963).

19. Hervada J. Lecciones propedéuticas de filosofía del derecho (3rd ed., Pamplona: Eunsa, 2000).

20. Jakab A. Problems of the Stufenbaulehre: Kelsen’s Failure to Derive the Validity of a Norm from Another Norm, 20 (1) Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence 35 (2007).

21. Jhering R. von. Der Kampf ums Recht (Vienna: Manz, 1872).

22. Kelsen H. Adolf Merkl Zu Seinem Siebzigsten Geburtstag, am 23 März 1960, 10 Österreichische Zeitschrift für Öffentliches Recht 228 (1960).

23. Kelsen H. Allgemeine Theorie der Normen (Vienna: Manz, 1979).

24. Kelsen H. Das Problem der Souveränität und die Theorie des Völkerrechts (Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr, 1920).

25. Kelsen H. Hauptprobleme der Staatsrechtslehre: entwickelt aus der Lehre vom Rechtssatze (Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr, 1923).

26. Kelsen H. Reichsgesetz und Landesgesetz nach österreichischer Verfassung, 32 (3) Archiv des öffentlichen Rechts 390 (1914).

27. Kelsen H. Reine Rechtslehre (Vienna: Österreich, 1934).

28. Kelsen H. Zur Lehre vom öffentlichen Rechtsgeschäft, 31 (1) Archiv des öffentlichen Rechts 53 (1913).

29. Kucsko-Stadlmayer G. La Contribución de Adolf Merkl a la Teoría Pura del Derecho, 55 (244) Revista de la Facultad de Derecho de México 243 (2005).

30. Langford P. & Bryan I. Hans Kelsen’s Theory of Legal Monism: A Critical Engagement with the Emerging Legal Order of the 1920s, 14 (1) Journal of the History of International Law 51 (2012).

31. Leclercq J. Leçons de droit naturel. Vol. 1: Le fondement du droit et de la société (Namur: Wesmael-Charlier, 1947).

32. Luhmann N. Theory of Society (R. Barrett (trans.), Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2012).

33. MacCormick N. Legal Reasoning and Legal Theory (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1978).

34. Magnus A.S. Alberti Magni Quaestiones de Bono (H. Kühle (ed.), Bonn: Sumptibus Petri Hanstein, 1933).

35. Messner J. Das Naturrecht: Handbuch der Gesellschaftsethik, Staatsethik und Wirtschaftsethik (6th ed., Vienna; Munich; Innsbruck: Tyrolia, 1966).

36. Mouchet C. & Zorraquín Becú R. Introducción al Derecho (Buenos Aires: AbeledoPerrot, 1967).

37. Olivecrona K. Law as Fact (London: Oxford University Press, 1939).

38. Pattaro E. Hans Kelsen’s Normativist Reductionism, 21 (2) Ratio Juris 268 (2008).

39. Paulson S.L. How Merkl’s Stufenbaulehre Informs Kelsen’s Concept of Law, 21 Revus 29 (2013).

40. Paulson S.L. On the Puzzle Surrounding Hans Kelsen’s Basic Norm, 13 (3) Ratio Juris 279 (2000).

41. Polo L. Introducción a la filosofía (Pamplona: Eunsa, 1995).

42. Ramírez S.M. De ordine placita quaedam thomistica (Salamanca: San Esteban, 1963).

43. Somek A. Stateless Law: Kelsen’s Conception and its Limits, 26 (4) Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 753 (2006).

44. Stammler R. Die Lehre vom richtigen Recht (Berlin, 1902).

45. Telman J. The Reception of Hans Kelsen’s Legal Theory in the United States: A Sociological Model, 24 L’Observateur des Nations Unis 1 (2008).

46. Verdross A. La filosofía del derecho del mundo occidental (México: UNAM, Centro de Estudios Filosóficos, 1962).

For citation:

Riofrío J.C. Kelsen, the New Inverted Pyramid and the Classics of Constitutional Law. Russian Law Journal. 2019;7(1):87-118.

Views: 221

ISSN 2309-8678 (Print)
ISSN 2312-3605 (Online)