legal reality.What could have made a marked and definite difference between the two theories is their respective standpoints with regard to the actions of the organs of state themselves, but in either case the actual effects of the actions remain the same, and do so irrespective of underlying theory. For instance, in the case of a crime the effects are the same, but the underlying reasons for punishment differ. However, this fact worries neither the criminal, the judge, nor the authorities, for according to them what matters is the action itself; what is judged is the action, but not the command or the declaration of will behind the rule justifying the judgment.The decisive factor is not the form of the command or declaration, but the expression of the will. As has been indicated before the main focus of Hägerström’s critique is his analysis of the foundations of the positivistic willtheory, which is the idea that the will of a specific physical subject can make law.120 In other words, one might contend that what the will-theory is concerned with is not the rules themselves, but their political legitimacy and justification. If the rules, in any sense of the word, originate from the will of the people, then they are just, legitimate, and thus obligatory. If this contention is correct, then the will-theory is not so much a theory of law as one of political science. For what the will-theory ultimately wishes to accomplish is the justification of law with reference to its origin in what according to the political theory of the investigated society in question makes up the highest circles of power - be it the people, legislative assembly, sovereign, state, nation, clergy, or what have you. Materially the only difference between the imperative and the declarative theories is their respective understanding of the nature of legal norms and propositions. First: Are norms imperatives or declarations (of intent)? Second:Why should one follow the legal norms and propositions? In his analysis of the will-theory, Hägerström laid great emphasis on the imperative-theory a ca l l f o r s c i e n t i f i c p u r i t y 329 120 Hägerström, “Svikligt förtigande,” p. 311 and 335.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=