In my master's thesis, I dedicate myself to the relationship between morality and law. I have described the relationship between morality and law, taking into account their differences and connections, and the two main theories that have long been dealing with this issue - legal positivism and natural law. Legal positivists advocate the separation thesis of law and morality - in their opinion, the law is separate from morality. Natural law later called more non-positivism, it acknowledges the essential conceptual connection between law and morality, or the essential connection between legal validity and legal correctness on the one hand, and moral correctness on the other. I also think that between law and morality there is essential conceptual connection. In addition, I dealt with Radbruch in the task, which laid the bridge between the ever-opposing theories of natural law and legal positivism and within this formula (according to him called Radbruch's formula), even though, unfortunately, in practice, it has not been much established. The formula is trying to find the right way between legal security and justice. Unfortunately, the struggle for its enforcement is often only de lege ferenda. I studied Fuller's natural procedural law - the requirements of the internal morality of law that reflect the relationship between morality and law. If we do not take them into account, then we do not have to deal with bad law, but we have something to do with something that is not right at all. Fuller is trying to explain the importance of morality. In the case of the practice of the Slovenian courts, I dealt with fundamental human rights, which represent modern natural law and have been transferred to modern constitutions. Fundamental rights need to be respected, therefore it is inevitably necessary moral criticism, which seeks to ensure that positive law is in accordance with generally accepted moral values.
|