Igor A. Kravets
Novosibirsk State University, Novosibirsk, Russia, email@example.com, https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5291-7177
Abstract. The article examines bioconstitutionalism and neuroconstitutionalism as theoretical and constitutional-legal categories in modern multifaceted jurisprudence; scientific approaches to understanding dignity in bioethics, bio-law and neuro-law, its role in the formation of the humanistic, existential and bioethical core of modern bioneuroconstitutionalism; conceptual, international legal and constitutional aspects of the formation of a complex meta-legal and intersectoral institution of bioneuroconstitutionalism. The author undertakes the research to critically evaluate the ethical and legal foundations of bio-law and neu-rolaw; it reveals the problem of the limits and significance of the constitutionalization of bio-rights and neuro-rights in the modern doctrine of constitutionalism and human rights.
The aim in this article is to study the meaning and prospects of the formation of bioneuroconstitutionalism as a legal dialogue focused on new human rights (biosocial and bioethical living creatures) between human dignity and human personality, on the one hand, and the achievements of bioethics, biomedicine, and neuroscience, on the other hand. The article considers dignity as a humanistic, existential, and bioethical core in the structure of bioneuroconstitutionalism.
Part I of the article considers bioneuroconstitutionalism as strategic constitutionalism in the context of the convergence of law with new technologies and practices, the development of human civilization during the Anthropocene period; the article also analyzes the bioethical, neuroethical and legal foundations of bioneuroconstitutionalism, the relationship between individual autonomy and the principle of solidarity, and suggests the doctrinal concepts of “bioconstitutionalism” and “neuroconstitutionalism”.
The author uses the discursive approach and critical rationalism in legal research, methods of dialectics, legal hermeneutics, and legal engineering, which allow to reveal the legal, biosocial, and bioethical nature of human dignity and constitutionalism in the context of the risks associated with posthumanism and transhumanism.
The conclusions are: the nature of bioconstitutionalism and neuroconstitutionalism is formed under the influence of the ideas of bioethics, posthumanism and transhumanism, new bioneurotechnologies; it involves the creation of regulatory requirements and restrictions for the use of such technologies, as well as for the establishment, guarantee and possible constitutionalization of new bioethical and neuroethical human rights.
Keywords: bioconstitutionalism, dignity, dignitatis humanae, neuroconstitutionalism, neuro-law, bio-law, legal biomedicine, bioethics, human rights, dignity and patient rights
For citation. Kravets I. A. Bioneuroconstitutionalism and Dignity: Theoretical Foundations, Dialogue of Ethical and Legal Requirements and Prospects for Interaction (Part I). Journal of Russian Law, 2022, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 5—22. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.12737/jrl.2022.013