Between Kelsen as legal theorist and Kelsen as political philosopher: a systematic premise for overcoming the dichotomy

This research aims to examine the apparent dichotomy between Hans Kelsen as legal theorist and Hans Kelsen as political philosopher. The article sheds light on how the established discourse is oriented around a clear “divide” believed to exist between Kelsen’s theoretical and political perspectives. It is particularly emphasized how Kelsen's democratic political stance is often overshadowed by his more well-known identity as a legal theorist. The article also addresses concerns related to the perceived lack of relevance in Kelsen's political thinking. The working hypotheses, aimed at overcoming this dichotomy, suggest that depersonalization of the State, redefinition of the role of Parliament and requalification of the concepts of democracy and Constitution are crucial elements in understanding the intersection between Kelsen’s legal theory and political philosophy. Finally, on a constructive note, the article argues that a unified interpretation of Kelsen’s thought could renew the relevance of his doctrine. Once the dichotomy is overcome, it is not far-fetched to consider a structural and functional model which could address current challenges, such as the alleged “democratic deficit” in the European Union.