Abstract

The comment consists of two parts. In the first part, I will challenge, on analytical grounds, Sampaio’s views on the kind of conflict that emerges between fundamental rights norms. I will claim that these conflicts can in fact be seen as total-total in abstracto conflicts, rather than partial-partial in concreto conflicts. In the second part, I will set forth a normative thesis advocating a possible alternative way of solving conflicts between fundamental rights norms which rests heavily on the legal system’s institutional history as the necessary, although not sufficient, criterion for giving precedence to one of the conflicting fundamental rights norms.