Abstract

This paper examines the issue of falsehood from a legal theoretical perspective. In particular, it is aimed at verifying the incompatibility of the lies structure with legal norms. Thus, the analytical reasoning of the "cheating's paradox" crosses reasons of justice. Nevertheless, the prohibition to lie about specific facts shows the current connection between law and falsehood. This ban often happens to be a tool, which measures the degree of democracy within legal systems, in so far as different and opposite interests are at stake. Among the tasks of the constitutional democratic state, there is also the one of avoiding the rise of "constitutive lying norms", whereas the prohibition to lie can be permitted. The paper takes the "lois mémorielles" as example and analyses the contribution of the law against denials to the functioning of constitutional democracy.