The scope and type of property rights recognized over the effectiveness of antibiotics have a direct effect on how those claiming ownership engage in the exploitation and stewardship of this scarce resource. We examine the different property claims and rights the four major interest groups are asserting on antibiotics: (i) the inventors, (ii) those demanding that the resource be treated like any other transferable commodity, (iii) those advocating usage restrictions based on good stewardship principles and (iv) those considering the resource (...) as common heritage of humankind. (shrink)

Nacido en 1790 y fallecido en 1932 víctima de la pandemia de cólera, Thomas Skidmore es uno de los principales representantes del agrarismo en los Estados Unidos de la primera mitad del siglo XIX. Inspirado por las ideas desarrolladas por Thomas Paine en Agrarian Justice, en 1829 publicó el libro The rights of Man to property en el que desarrolla las consecuencias de la idea según la cual, siendo el mundo una propiedad común de todos los hombres, cada uno tiene (...) un derecho imprescriptible a una parte igual de los recursos naturales. Entre estas consecuencias figura la tesis de que este derecho hace imposible todo derecho a testar, pues tal derecho haría de todo punto imposible que cada nuevo individuo incorporado tuviera acceso a la justa parte de propiedad a la que tendría derecho. Skidmore elabora así una teoría precisa acerca de las razones por las que el testador, tras su muerte, no puede tener derecho alguno sobre los bienes de los que fue propietario en vida. Born in 1790 and victim of the cholera pandemics in 1832, Thomas Skidmore is one of the main representatives of agrarianism in the United states during the first half of the XIXth century. Inspired by the principles Thomas Paine had put forth in Agrarian justice, Skidmore publishes in 1829 a book entitled The rights of man to property in which he states the consequences of the idea that, the world being the common property of all men, every individual has an imprescriptible right to an equal share of natural resources. Among those consequences is the claim that such a principle makes any right of bequest and inheritance absolutely impossible, since such a right would make it impossible that each new individual arriving in the world has an effective right of access to the just share of property he is entitled to. Skidmore builds in consequence a precise explanation of the reasons why the testator, after his death, can no longer have any right over the properties he owned during his lifetime. (shrink)

Can the global poor wage a just redistributive war against the global rich? The moral norms governing the use of force are usually considered to be very strict. Nonetheless, some philosophers have recently argued that violating duties of global justicecanbe a just cause for war. This paper discusses redistributive wars. It shows that the strength of these arguments is contingent on the underlying account of global distributive justice. The paper focuses on the “doing harm argument,” under the assumption that the (...) alternative “allowing harm argument” is a more difficult route to justify redistributive wars. After highlighting several preliminary problems, the paper breaks down and assesses in depth the “doing harm argument”: the empirical premise, the rights violation that constitutes the wrong, liability and degrees of responsibility, and the conditions for justified self-defense. By drawing on principles reflected in criminal law, this paper argues that a general “doing harm argument” for redistributive wars is unconvincing, while a reinterpretation of that argument could theoretically give rise to a just cause for war. (shrink)

Informal justice often is castigated as rough justice, procedurally unauthorized and substantively unrationalized and prone to error. Yet those same features are present, to some extent, in formal justice as well: they do not form the basis for any sharp categorical contrast between formal and informal justice. Furthermore, some roughness in justice may be no bad thing. Certain of those elements of roughness in formal justice are inextricably bound up with other features of formal justice that are rightly deemed morally (...) important. And rough informal justice can sometimes be used to change formal justice in more just directions. (shrink)

This article argues that, far from being a merely defensive act of individual protest, civil disobedience is a much more radical political practice. It is transformative in that it aims at the politicization of questions that are excluded from the political domain and at reconfiguring public space and existing institutions, often in comprehensive ways. Focusing on the reconstitution of the political community also allows us to reconceptualize constituent power. Rather than portraying it as a quasi-mythical force erupting only in extraordinary (...) moments, constituent power can be conceptualized as a dynamic situated within established orders, transgressing their logic and reconfiguring them from within. Civil disobedience as a transformative and potentially comprehensive practice aimed at reconstituting the political order can then be seen as an internal driving force keeping this dialectic in play. A concrete example can be found in protests and border struggles by irregularized migrants. They show how unexp... (shrink)