The controversies about legal indeterminacy and the thesis of the ‘norm as a framework’ in Kelsen

Abstract

One of the most persistent controversies in law is related to its completeness or incompleteness. In the context of the debate between inconclusive law or the completeness of the law, the main argument of the paper is that Hans Kelsen paradoxically converges with Ronald Dworkin in denying legal indeterminacy, and albeit from radically different and opposing positions, both of them would arrive at the same conclusion in the discussion about completeness or incompleteness in the law: the law is ‘complete’. Both advocate a position contrary to HLA Hart.