Abstract

Commenting on Giorgio Pino's contribution to this discussion on social rights, the paper considers two alternative conceptions of fundamental rights. According to the molecular conception, fundamental rights are cluster of atomistic rights (Hohfeldian incidents: privileges, claims, powers and immunities), while, according to the atomistic conception they are single claims, or double claims, that limits the exercise of political authority by all the subjects involved in its exercise. The paper argues that the atomistic conception of fundamental rights provides a better justification for the idea that social rights are fundamental rights and a better understanding of the distinctive characters of the guarantees of fundamental rights.