The hermeneutics as a substrate to conflicts over fundamental rights: Communicative freedoms vs. personality rights

Abstract

The present study aims to underpin the relevance of the constitutional foundations, along with a contemporary thought about the importance of interpretation for the law in pursuit of achieving the constitutional objectives. Following such a foundation is the debate about the interpretive problems involving fundamental rights, thus, before any assessment, referring to specific cases pertaining to conflicts of communicative freedoms and rights of personality, as well as the management principle of proportionality, it requires an exhibition on the grounds that it argues for hermeneutics. Thus, understanding that the Constitution of 1988 inaugurated a new stage in the study of hermeneutics, different paradigms and conflicts can be questioned. Therefore, from a new constitutional interpretative perspective combined with post-positivist thinking, shape up sufficient evidence to re-examine the conflict between the rights proposed. For its high relevance, hermeneutics requires a more detailed assessment, at the risk of incurring outdated views, in this way, hermeneutics deserves the analysis of this new vision of law, so as to provide different approaches to an old conflict, the same time that brings light to certain misconceptions of critical national jurisprudence. 

Key words: hermeneutics, fundamental rights, proportionality.