The normative force of the constitution according to Ferdinand Lassalle and Konrad Hesse

Abstract

What constitutes the pillar of the entire legal system of a nation, therefore, its application and effectiveness that constitute a determining factor in the order and full functioning of a State, is its constitution. The objective of this research was to analyze the similarities and differences in approaches to the essence of the constitution according to the thoughts of Lassalle and Hesse. The question arises: does one author’s thoughts cancel out another’s? Do they have an antagonistic perspective of conceptualizing the Constitution? The method used was inductive, which allows us to analyze the particular ideas of each author and only then arrive at an overview of their works. The methodology used was bibliographical research, which consists of reviewing the literature related to the topic addressed. To this end, books, periodicals, articles, Internet sites and other sources were used. At the end of the research it was inferred that the thoughts of these two great jurists are not antagonistic but rather have different views that in turn complement each other. While Lassalle states that a written Constitution is good and lasting when it corresponds to the Real Constitution and has its roots in factors of power that govern the country, otherwise it would just be a piece of paper. Konrad Hesse aims to demonstrate that political and social factors should not be ignored as they have strength and relevance, but that even in the face of this the Constitution has its own strength, not being at the mercy of political and social events.