Publication at Faculty of Law |
2018
Abstract
The contribution analyses the controversial Otto-Preminger-Institut v. Austria judgement of the ECtHR using concepts and vocabulary related to the well-known debate between proponents of the harm principle and legal moralism.
It shows that is possible to remove some of the internal contradictions of the judgement's rationale if it is understood as a defence of public morals rather than as protection of the rights of others. More generally, the contribution points out the utility of the explicatory framework in question for the understanding of morally controversial judgements in which the protection of the rights of others is connected with the protection of members of mainstream society.