{"id":2501,"date":"2023-06-23T14:15:15","date_gmt":"2023-06-23T14:15:15","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/publicacoes\/distinguishing-the-distinguishable-interpretative-norms-and-interpretative-criteria-in-adjudication-of-meaning\/"},"modified":"2023-09-22T13:31:29","modified_gmt":"2023-09-22T13:31:29","slug":"distinguishing-the-distinguishable-interpretative-norms-and-interpretative-criteria-in-adjudication-of-meaning","status":"publish","type":"publicacoes","link":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/en\/publicacoes\/distinguishing-the-distinguishable-interpretative-norms-and-interpretative-criteria-in-adjudication-of-meaning\/","title":{"rendered":"Distinguishing the distinguishable: interpretative norms and interpretative criteria in adjudication of meaning"},"content":{"rendered":"

Interpretative norms are contingent norms of legal systems: a system either comprises them or it does not and, if it does, it can comprise either interpretative norm \u00abA\u00bb or \u00abB\u00bb. Interpretative norms are norms that provide criteria (namely, lawmaker\u2019s intention or coherence of the system) to choose among the alternatives of meaning given by a linguistically uncertain norm sentence. When applied by the agent, an interpretative norm either solves the uncertainty at hand (selecting one meaning) or, if such reduction of interpretive discretion to zero is not the case, simply decreases the range of uncertainty. In this latter scenario, a solution ought to be obtained (prohibition of non liquet) and the agent is \u00abfree\u00bb to elect other criteria for the choice. However, criteria provided by interpretative norms and these other \u00abelected criteria\u00bb are not at the same level (they have different deontic statuses): the permissible selection and application of such \u00abelected criteria\u00bb to a linguistically uncertain norm sentence is only admissible when the mandatory criteria provided by interpretative norms are exhausted.<\/p>","protected":false},"template":"","meta":{"imagem-da-publicacao":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/interpretivism.webp","areas-de-investigacao":"Teoria do Direito","investigador-responsavel":[],"editor-externo":"Tomasz Gizbert-Studnicki; Francesca Poggi; Izabela Skocze\u0144","editor":["1759"],"autores-externos":"David Duarte","referencia-biografica":"DUARTE, David; MONIZ LOPES, Pedro: Distinguishing the distinguishable: interpretative norms and interpretative criteria in adjudication of meaning, IN: Gizbert-Studnicki, Tomasz; Poggi, Francesca; Skocze\u0144, Izabela (eds.), Interpretivism and the Limits of Law, Edward Elgar, 2022.","projeto-a-que-pertence":"Lisbon Legal Theory","selecionar_o_projeto_a_que_pertence":[],"titulo-do-livro-revista":"Interpretivism and the Limits of Law","ano":"2022","isbn":"978-180-2209-32-7","editora":"Edward Elgar","link-para-download":"https:\/\/www.elgaronline.com\/edcollchap\/book\/9781802209327\/book-part-9781802209327-17.xml"},"cluster":[34],"categoria-da-publicacao":[24],"grupo-de-investigacao":[13],"class_list":["post-2501","publicacoes","type-publicacoes","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","cluster-lisbon-legal-theory","categoria-da-publicacao-capitulo-de-livro","grupo-de-investigacao-teoria-e-filosofia-do-direito"],"yoast_head":"\n"Distinguishing the distinguishable: interpretative norms and interpretative criteria in adjudication of meaning"<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Interpretative norms are contingent norms of legal systems: a system either comprises them or it does not and, if it does, it can comprise either interpretative norm \u00abA\u00bb or \u00abB\u00bb. Interpretative norms are norms that provide criteria (namely, lawmaker\u2019s intention or coherence of the system) to choose among the alternatives of meaning given by a linguistically uncertain norm sentence. When applied by the agent, an interpretative norm either solves the uncertainty at hand (selecting one meaning) or, if such reduction of interpretive discretion to zero is not the case, simply decreases the range of uncertainty. In this latter scenario, a solution ought to be obtained (prohibition of non liquet) and the agent is \u00abfree\u00bb to elect other criteria for the choice. However, criteria provided by interpretative norms and these other \u00abelected criteria\u00bb are not at the same level (they have different deontic statuses): the permissible selection and application of such \u00abelected criteria\u00bb to a linguistically uncertain norm sentence is only admissible when the mandatory criteria provided by interpretative norms are exhausted.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/en\/publicacoes\/distinguishing-the-distinguishable-interpretative-norms-and-interpretative-criteria-in-adjudication-of-meaning\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\""Distinguishing the distinguishable: interpretative norms and interpretative criteria in adjudication of meaning"\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Interpretative norms are contingent norms of legal systems: a system either comprises them or it does not and, if it does, it can comprise either interpretative norm \u00abA\u00bb or \u00abB\u00bb. Interpretative norms are norms that provide criteria (namely, lawmaker\u2019s intention or coherence of the system) to choose among the alternatives of meaning given by a linguistically uncertain norm sentence. When applied by the agent, an interpretative norm either solves the uncertainty at hand (selecting one meaning) or, if such reduction of interpretive discretion to zero is not the case, simply decreases the range of uncertainty. In this latter scenario, a solution ought to be obtained (prohibition of non liquet) and the agent is \u00abfree\u00bb to elect other criteria for the choice. However, criteria provided by interpretative norms and these other \u00abelected criteria\u00bb are not at the same level (they have different deontic statuses): the permissible selection and application of such \u00abelected criteria\u00bb to a linguistically uncertain norm sentence is only admissible when the mandatory criteria provided by interpretative norms are exhausted.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/en\/publicacoes\/distinguishing-the-distinguishable-interpretative-norms-and-interpretative-criteria-in-adjudication-of-meaning\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Lisbon Public Law\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2023-09-22T13:31:29+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/interpretivism.webp\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"616\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"918\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/webp\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\""Distinguishing the distinguishable: interpretative norms and interpretative criteria in adjudication of meaning"\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:description\" content=\"Interpretative norms are contingent norms of legal systems: a system either comprises them or it does not and, if it does, it can comprise either interpretative norm \u00abA\u00bb or \u00abB\u00bb. Interpretative norms are norms that provide criteria (namely, lawmaker\u2019s intention or coherence of the system) to choose among the alternatives of meaning given by a linguistically uncertain norm sentence. When applied by the agent, an interpretative norm either solves the uncertainty at hand (selecting one meaning) or, if such reduction of interpretive discretion to zero is not the case, simply decreases the range of uncertainty. In this latter scenario, a solution ought to be obtained (prohibition of non liquet) and the agent is \u00abfree\u00bb to elect other criteria for the choice. However, criteria provided by interpretative norms and these other \u00abelected criteria\u00bb are not at the same level (they have different deontic statuses): the permissible selection and application of such \u00abelected criteria\u00bb to a linguistically uncertain norm sentence is only admissible when the mandatory criteria provided by interpretative norms are exhausted.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:image\" content=\"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/interpretivism.webp\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"1 minute\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\\\/publicacoes\\\/distinguishing-the-distinguishable-interpretative-norms-and-interpretative-criteria-in-adjudication-of-meaning\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\\\/publicacoes\\\/distinguishing-the-distinguishable-interpretative-norms-and-interpretative-criteria-in-adjudication-of-meaning\\\/\",\"name\":\"\\\"Distinguishing the distinguishable: interpretative norms and interpretative criteria in adjudication of meaning\\\"\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\\\/publicacoes\\\/distinguishing-the-distinguishable-interpretative-norms-and-interpretative-criteria-in-adjudication-of-meaning\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\\\/publicacoes\\\/distinguishing-the-distinguishable-interpretative-norms-and-interpretative-criteria-in-adjudication-of-meaning\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2023\\\/06\\\/interpretivism.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2023-06-23T14:15:15+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2023-09-22T13:31:29+00:00\",\"description\":\"Interpretative norms are contingent norms of legal systems: a system either comprises them or it does not and, if it does, it can comprise either interpretative norm \u00abA\u00bb or \u00abB\u00bb. Interpretative norms are norms that provide criteria (namely, lawmaker\u2019s intention or coherence of the system) to choose among the alternatives of meaning given by a linguistically uncertain norm sentence. When applied by the agent, an interpretative norm either solves the uncertainty at hand (selecting one meaning) or, if such reduction of interpretive discretion to zero is not the case, simply decreases the range of uncertainty. In this latter scenario, a solution ought to be obtained (prohibition of non liquet) and the agent is \u00abfree\u00bb to elect other criteria for the choice. However, criteria provided by interpretative norms and these other \u00abelected criteria\u00bb are not at the same level (they have different deontic statuses): the permissible selection and application of such \u00abelected criteria\u00bb to a linguistically uncertain norm sentence is only admissible when the mandatory criteria provided by interpretative norms are exhausted.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\\\/publicacoes\\\/distinguishing-the-distinguishable-interpretative-norms-and-interpretative-criteria-in-adjudication-of-meaning\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\\\/publicacoes\\\/distinguishing-the-distinguishable-interpretative-norms-and-interpretative-criteria-in-adjudication-of-meaning\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\\\/publicacoes\\\/distinguishing-the-distinguishable-interpretative-norms-and-interpretative-criteria-in-adjudication-of-meaning\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2023\\\/06\\\/interpretivism.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2023\\\/06\\\/interpretivism.webp\",\"width\":616,\"height\":918},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\\\/publicacoes\\\/distinguishing-the-distinguishable-interpretative-norms-and-interpretative-criteria-in-adjudication-of-meaning\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Publica\u00e7\u00f5es\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\\\/publicacoes\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":3,\"name\":\"Distinguishing the distinguishable: interpretative norms and interpretative criteria in adjudication of meaning\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\\\/\",\"name\":\"Lisbon Public Law\",\"description\":\"Public Law Research Centre in Lisbon\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Lisbon Public Law\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2023\\\/06\\\/WhatsApp-Image-2023-06-19-at-11.01.50-1.jpeg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2023\\\/06\\\/WhatsApp-Image-2023-06-19-at-11.01.50-1.jpeg\",\"width\":354,\"height\":354,\"caption\":\"Lisbon Public Law\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"}}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"\"Distinguishing the distinguishable: interpretative norms and interpretative criteria in adjudication of meaning\"","description":"Interpretative norms are contingent norms of legal systems: a system either comprises them or it does not and, if it does, it can comprise either interpretative norm \u00abA\u00bb or \u00abB\u00bb. Interpretative norms are norms that provide criteria (namely, lawmaker\u2019s intention or coherence of the system) to choose among the alternatives of meaning given by a linguistically uncertain norm sentence. When applied by the agent, an interpretative norm either solves the uncertainty at hand (selecting one meaning) or, if such reduction of interpretive discretion to zero is not the case, simply decreases the range of uncertainty. In this latter scenario, a solution ought to be obtained (prohibition of non liquet) and the agent is \u00abfree\u00bb to elect other criteria for the choice. However, criteria provided by interpretative norms and these other \u00abelected criteria\u00bb are not at the same level (they have different deontic statuses): the permissible selection and application of such \u00abelected criteria\u00bb to a linguistically uncertain norm sentence is only admissible when the mandatory criteria provided by interpretative norms are exhausted.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/en\/publicacoes\/distinguishing-the-distinguishable-interpretative-norms-and-interpretative-criteria-in-adjudication-of-meaning\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"\"Distinguishing the distinguishable: interpretative norms and interpretative criteria in adjudication of meaning\"","og_description":"Interpretative norms are contingent norms of legal systems: a system either comprises them or it does not and, if it does, it can comprise either interpretative norm \u00abA\u00bb or \u00abB\u00bb. Interpretative norms are norms that provide criteria (namely, lawmaker\u2019s intention or coherence of the system) to choose among the alternatives of meaning given by a linguistically uncertain norm sentence. When applied by the agent, an interpretative norm either solves the uncertainty at hand (selecting one meaning) or, if such reduction of interpretive discretion to zero is not the case, simply decreases the range of uncertainty. In this latter scenario, a solution ought to be obtained (prohibition of non liquet) and the agent is \u00abfree\u00bb to elect other criteria for the choice. However, criteria provided by interpretative norms and these other \u00abelected criteria\u00bb are not at the same level (they have different deontic statuses): the permissible selection and application of such \u00abelected criteria\u00bb to a linguistically uncertain norm sentence is only admissible when the mandatory criteria provided by interpretative norms are exhausted.","og_url":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/en\/publicacoes\/distinguishing-the-distinguishable-interpretative-norms-and-interpretative-criteria-in-adjudication-of-meaning\/","og_site_name":"Lisbon Public Law","article_modified_time":"2023-09-22T13:31:29+00:00","og_image":[{"width":616,"height":918,"url":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/interpretivism.webp","type":"image\/webp"}],"twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"\"Distinguishing the distinguishable: interpretative norms and interpretative criteria in adjudication of meaning\"","twitter_description":"Interpretative norms are contingent norms of legal systems: a system either comprises them or it does not and, if it does, it can comprise either interpretative norm \u00abA\u00bb or \u00abB\u00bb. Interpretative norms are norms that provide criteria (namely, lawmaker\u2019s intention or coherence of the system) to choose among the alternatives of meaning given by a linguistically uncertain norm sentence. When applied by the agent, an interpretative norm either solves the uncertainty at hand (selecting one meaning) or, if such reduction of interpretive discretion to zero is not the case, simply decreases the range of uncertainty. In this latter scenario, a solution ought to be obtained (prohibition of non liquet) and the agent is \u00abfree\u00bb to elect other criteria for the choice. However, criteria provided by interpretative norms and these other \u00abelected criteria\u00bb are not at the same level (they have different deontic statuses): the permissible selection and application of such \u00abelected criteria\u00bb to a linguistically uncertain norm sentence is only admissible when the mandatory criteria provided by interpretative norms are exhausted.","twitter_image":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/interpretivism.webp","twitter_misc":{"Est. reading time":"1 minute"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/publicacoes\/distinguishing-the-distinguishable-interpretative-norms-and-interpretative-criteria-in-adjudication-of-meaning\/","url":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/publicacoes\/distinguishing-the-distinguishable-interpretative-norms-and-interpretative-criteria-in-adjudication-of-meaning\/","name":"\"Distinguishing the distinguishable: interpretative norms and interpretative criteria in adjudication of meaning\"","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/publicacoes\/distinguishing-the-distinguishable-interpretative-norms-and-interpretative-criteria-in-adjudication-of-meaning\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/publicacoes\/distinguishing-the-distinguishable-interpretative-norms-and-interpretative-criteria-in-adjudication-of-meaning\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/interpretivism.webp","datePublished":"2023-06-23T14:15:15+00:00","dateModified":"2023-09-22T13:31:29+00:00","description":"Interpretative norms are contingent norms of legal systems: a system either comprises them or it does not and, if it does, it can comprise either interpretative norm \u00abA\u00bb or \u00abB\u00bb. Interpretative norms are norms that provide criteria (namely, lawmaker\u2019s intention or coherence of the system) to choose among the alternatives of meaning given by a linguistically uncertain norm sentence. When applied by the agent, an interpretative norm either solves the uncertainty at hand (selecting one meaning) or, if such reduction of interpretive discretion to zero is not the case, simply decreases the range of uncertainty. In this latter scenario, a solution ought to be obtained (prohibition of non liquet) and the agent is \u00abfree\u00bb to elect other criteria for the choice. However, criteria provided by interpretative norms and these other \u00abelected criteria\u00bb are not at the same level (they have different deontic statuses): the permissible selection and application of such \u00abelected criteria\u00bb to a linguistically uncertain norm sentence is only admissible when the mandatory criteria provided by interpretative norms are exhausted.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/publicacoes\/distinguishing-the-distinguishable-interpretative-norms-and-interpretative-criteria-in-adjudication-of-meaning\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/publicacoes\/distinguishing-the-distinguishable-interpretative-norms-and-interpretative-criteria-in-adjudication-of-meaning\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/publicacoes\/distinguishing-the-distinguishable-interpretative-norms-and-interpretative-criteria-in-adjudication-of-meaning\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/interpretivism.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/interpretivism.webp","width":616,"height":918},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/publicacoes\/distinguishing-the-distinguishable-interpretative-norms-and-interpretative-criteria-in-adjudication-of-meaning\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Publica\u00e7\u00f5es","item":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/publicacoes\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"Distinguishing the distinguishable: interpretative norms and interpretative criteria in adjudication of meaning"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/#website","url":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/","name":"Lisbon Public Law","description":"Public Law Research Centre in Lisbon","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/#organization","name":"Lisbon Public Law","url":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/WhatsApp-Image-2023-06-19-at-11.01.50-1.jpeg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/WhatsApp-Image-2023-06-19-at-11.01.50-1.jpeg","width":354,"height":354,"caption":"Lisbon Public Law"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/publicacoes\/2501","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/publicacoes"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/publicacoes"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2399"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2501"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"cluster","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/cluster?post=2501"},{"taxonomy":"categoria-da-publicacao","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categoria-da-publicacao?post=2501"},{"taxonomy":"grupo-de-investigacao","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lisbonpubliclaw.pt\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/grupo-de-investigacao?post=2501"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}