This dissertation examines the core of Hans Kelsen's legal theory and state theory up to 1930 within the context of the intellectual, social, and political situation in Austria at that time. This approach reveals how Kelsen positioned administration within democracy in the following sense: Even in the first stage of creating general norms, and in the second stage of executing them through individual acts, the state's will to restrict freedom can be formed. While the second stage of executive acts operates under the notion of conformity to law, this notion stands in tension with democracy and freedom. For administration to function democratically, expanding the scope of administrative discretion is indispensable. Furthermore, the notion of conformity to law must be maintained to realize democracy. Democratic procedural devices—constitutional adjudication and administrative adjudication—must be established as control systems to guarantee freedom and human rights and protect minorities. In this process of linking state, administration, and freedom, Kelsen sought to overcome the problems of positivism. Kelsen's intellectual approach, as outlined above, provides clues for resolving challenges facing contemporary Japanese administrative law scholarship.

Note: Registration is not required for this event.