245 KB94 KB201120252021Novak, Alešštevilka:letn. 81str. 109-140, 244, 254DOI:10.51940/2021.1.109-140ISSN:1854-3839COBISSID:90811395URN:URN:NBN:SI:doc-25J7SIWKslPravna fakultetaZbornik znanstvenih razprav (Pravna fakulteta. 1991)kodifikacijapravorazumevanjesodnikisubjektivnostsvobodnopravno gibanjeteorija pravaPravičnost onkraj zakona| svobodnopravno gibanje in iskanje nove zasnove prava|The author argues that the Free Law Movement should be understood as a critical response to a specific ideology about the nature and application of law, which was a result of and arose from the codification of law, taking place at the time across Europe. The Free Law Movement took issue with then commonly accepted view that positive law is in itself complete and called attention to the existence of gaps in law, arguing that law in inherently incomplete. Its followers also rejected the notion that application of law resembles logical deduction (from abstract legal norms) and highlight the importance of subjectivity in judicial decision-making. A demand that the judge be bound by the law is exposed by the free lawyers as nothing else but an ideological veil, hiding from our gaze the true motives behind judicial application of the law. In their view, a judge creates law on an equal footing with the legislature and shares the responsibility for a just outcome of a case in hand. Despite all the shortcomings Free Law Movement has, it offered an interesting and stimulating view on the nature of law and its application, which provided a corner-stone for modern understanding of lawAvtor v članku zagovarja tezo, da pomeni svobodnopravno gibanje kritičen odziv na specifično ideologijo o naravi in uporabljanju prava, ki se je izoblikovala pod vplivom kodifikacije prava na kontinentu. Svobodnopravniki podvomijo v takrat splošno sprejeto predpostavko, da je pozitivno pravo popolno in opozorijo na obstoj pravnih praznin, ki kažejo na potrebo po dopolnjevanju prava. Zavračajo tudi razumevanje, po katerem je treba uporabljanje prava razumeti kot logično dedukcijo vsebine iz abstraktnih pravnih norm, in opozorijo na pomembno vlogo, ki jo v uporabljanju prava ima človekova subjektivnost. V zahtevi po strogi vezanosti sodnika na zakon prepoznajo ideološko tančico, ki prikriva resnične vzgibe sodniškega odločanja. Sodnik tako pridobi vlogo soustvarjalca prava, ki si z zakonodajalcem deli odgovornost za pravično sodno odločitev. Kljub vsem slabostim je svobodnopravno gibanje ponudilo zanimiv in ploden pogled na naravo in uporabljanje prava, ki je postavilo temelj sodobnemu razumevanju pravaTEXTznanstveno časopisjejournalsSlovenian National E-content AggregatorNational and University Library of SloveniaUniverza v Ljubljani, Pravna fakulteta