Theories of Legal Argumentation and the Application of Human Rights

Abstract

In this research we intend to analyze the way in which legal argumentation has become a pillar of the judicial function and the administration of justice. Based on the establishment of diffuse conventionality and constitutionality systems. Since it posits a new way of regarding the Law, different from the school of exegesis and from legal positivism. In order to achieve this we will address the stages of legal argumentation through its main exponents. As well as the way in which World War II and the trials that derived from it managed to expose the weaknesses of blind obedience to the rules, even more so when it comes to public servers such as judges or magistrates. We also present the challenges facing the theory of legal argumentation, in addition to pointing out some relevant cases that produced a set of criteria that helped to improve the function of the administration of justice.