This book brings recent insights about sovereignty and citizen participation in the Belgian Constitution to scholars in the fields of law, philosophy, history, and politics. Throughout the Western world, there are increasing calls for greater citizen participation. Referendums, citizen councils, and other forms of direct democracy are considered necessary antidotes to a growing hostility towards traditional party politics. This book focuses on the Belgian debate, where the introduction of participatory politics has stalled because of an ambiguity in the Constitution. Scholars and judges generally claim that the Belgian Constitution gives ultimate power to the nation, which can only speak through representation in parliament. In light of this, direct democracy would be an unconstitutional power grab by the current generation of citizens. This book critically investigates this received interpretation of the Constitution and, by reaching back to the debates among Belgium’s 1831 founding fathers, concludes that it is untenable. The spirit, if not the text, of the Belgian Constitution allows for more popular participation than present-day jurisprudence admits. This book is the first to make recent debates in this field accessible to international scholars. It provides a rare source of information on Belgium’s 1831 Constitution, which was in its time seen as modern constitutionalism’s greatest triumph and which became a model for countless other constitutions. Yet the questions it asks reverberate far beyond Belgium. Combining new insights from law, philosophy, history, and politics, this book is a showcase for continental constitutional theory. It will be a valuable resource for academics and researchers in constitutional law, political and legal philosophy, and legal history.

In a set of cases decided at the end of the nineteenth century, the Supreme Court declared that Congress had "plenary power" to regulate immigration, Indian tribes, and newly acquired territories. Not coincidentally, the groups subject to Congress' plenary power were primarily nonwhite and generally perceived as "uncivilized." The Court left Congress free to craft policies of assimilation, exclusion, paternalism, and domination. Despite dramatic shifts in constitutional law in the twentieth century, the plenary power case decisions remain largely the controlling law. The Warren Court, widely recognized for its dedication to individual rights, focused on ensuring "full and equal citizenship"--an agenda that utterly neglected immigrants, tribes, and residents of the territories. The Rehnquist Court has appropriated the Warren Court's rhetoric of citizenship, but has used it to strike down policies that support diversity and the sovereignty of Indian tribes. Attuned to the demands of a new century, the author argues for abandonment of the plenary power cases, and for more flexible conceptions of sovereignty and citizenship. The federal government ought to negotiate compacts with Indian tribes and the territories that affirm more durable forms of self-government. Citizenship should be "decentered," understood as a commitment to an intergenerational national project, not a basis for denying rights to immigrants.

This book focuses on sovereignty referendums, which have been used throughout different historical periods of democratization, decolonization, devolution, secession and state creation. Referendums on questions of sovereignty and self-determination have been a significant element of the international political and legal landscape since the French Revolution, and have been a central element in the resolution of territorial issues from the referendum in Avignon in 1791 until today. More recent examples include Quebec, East Timor, New Caledonia, Puerto Rico and South Sudan. The global aim of this book is to achieve a better empirical and legal understanding of sovereignty referendums and related problems in international and national law and politics. Accordingly, it presents readers a comprehensive study of sovereignty referendums from the perspectives of both international and constitutional law.

This book explores the recent trend of enhancing the role of the people in constitutional change. It traces the reasons underlying this tendency, the new ways in which it takes form, the possibilities of success and failure of such ventures as well as the risks and benefits it carries. To do so, it examines the theoretical aspects of public participation in constitutional decision-making, offers an analysis of the benefits gained and the problems encountered in countries with long-standing experience in the practice of constitutional referendums, discusses the recent innovative constitution-making processes employed in Iceland and Ireland in the post financial crisis context and probes the use of public participation in the EU context. New modes of deliberation are juxtaposed to traditional direct-democratic processes, while the reasons behind this re-emergence of public involvement narratives are discussed from the aspect of comparative constitutional design. The synthetic chapter offers an overview of the emerging normative and comparative issues and provides a holistic approach of the role of the people in constitutional change in an attempt to answer when, where and how this role may be successfully enhanced. The work consists of material specifically written for this volume, and authored by prominent constitutional scholars and experts in public participation and deliberative processes.

Sovereignty in Transition brings together a group of leading scholars from law and cognate disciplines to assess contemporary developments in the framework of ideas and the variety of institutional forms associated with the concept of sovereignty. Sovereignty has been described as the main organising concept of the international society of states - one which is traditionally central to the discipline and practice of both constitutional law and of international law. The volume asks to what extent,and with what implications, this centrality is challenged by contemporary developments that shift authority away from the state to new sub-state, supra-state and non-state forms. A particular focus of attention is the European Union, and the relationship between the sovereignty traditions of various member states on the one hand and the new claims to authority made on behalf of the European Union itself on the other are examined. The collection also includes contributions from international law, legal philosophy, legal history, political theory, political science, international relations and theology that seek to examine the state of the sovereignty debate in these disciplines in ways that throw light on the focal constitutional debate in the European Union.

This book brings recent insights about sovereignty and citizen participation in the Belgian Constitution to scholars in the fields of law, philosophy, history, and politics. Throughout the Western world, there are increasing calls for greater citizen participation. Referendums, citizen councils, and other forms of direct democracy are considered necessary antidotes to a growing hostility towards traditional party politics. This book focuses on the Belgian debate, where the introduction of participatory politics has stalled because of an ambiguity in the Constitution. Scholars and judges generally claim that the Belgian Constitution gives ultimate power to the nation, which can only speak through representation in parliament. In light of this, direct democracy would be an unconstitutional power grab by the current generation of citizens. This book critically investigates this received interpretation of the Constitution and, by reaching back to the debates among Belgium’s 1831 founding fathers, concludes that it is untenable. The spirit, if not the text, of the Belgian Constitution allows for more popular participation than present-day jurisprudence admits. This book is the first to make recent debates in this field accessible to international scholars. It provides a rare source of information on Belgium’s 1831 Constitution, which was in its time seen as modern constitutionalism’s greatest triumph and which became a model for countless other constitutions. Yet the questions it asks reverberate far beyond Belgium. Combining new insights from law, philosophy, history, and politics, this book is a showcase for continental constitutional theory. It will be a valuable resource for academics and researchers in constitutional law, political and legal philosophy, and legal history.

Constitutional politics has become a major terrain of contemporary struggles. Contestation around designing, replacing, revising, and dramatically re-interpreting constitutions is proliferating worldwide. Starting with Southern Europe in post-Franco Spain, then in the ex-Communist countries in Central Europe, post-apartheid South Africa, and now in the Arab world, constitution making has become a project not only of radical political movements, but of liberals and conservatives as well. Wherever new states or new regimes will emerge in the future, whether through negotiations, revolutionary process, federation, secession, or partition, the making of new constitutions will be a key item on the political agenda. Combining historical comparison, constitutional theory, and political analysis, this volume links together theory and comparative analysis in order to orient actors engaged in constitution making processes all over the world. The book examines two core phenomena: the development of a new, democratic paradigm of constitution making, and the resulting change in the normative discussions of constitutions, their creation, and the source of their legitimacy. After setting out a theoretical framework for understanding these developments, Andrew Arato examines recent constitutional politics in South Africa, Hungary, Turkey, and Latin America and discusses the political stakes in constitution-making. The book concludes by offering a systematic critique of the alternative to the new paradigm, populism and populist constituent politics.

This book brings recent insights about sovereignty and citizen participation in the Belgian Constitution to scholars in the fields of public law, history, and political theory. Throughout the Western world, there are increasing calls for greater citizen participation. Referendums, citizen councils, and other forms of direct democracy are considered necessary antidotes to a growing hostility towards traditional party politics. This book focuses on the Belgian debate, where the introduction of participatory politics has stalled because of an ambiguity in the Constitution. Scholars and judges generally claim that the Belgian Constitution gives ultimate power to the Nation, which can only speak through representation in parliament. In light of this, direct democracy would be an unconstitutional power grab by the current generation of citizens. This book critically investigates this received interpretation of the Constitution and, by reaching back to the debates among Belgium's 1831 founding fathers, concludes that it is untenable. The spirit, if not the text, of the Belgian Constitution allows for more popular participation than present-day jurisprudence admits. Combining new insights from law, history, and political science, this book is a showcase for continental constitutional theory. The questions it asks reverberate far beyond Belgium. The book provides a rare source of information on Belgium's 1831 Constitution, which was in its time seen as modern constitutionalism's greatest triumph which became a model for countless other constitutions.

The idea of sovereignty and the debates that surround it are not merely of historical, academic, or legal interest: they are also potent, vibrant issues and as current and relevant as today's front page news in the United States and in other Western democracies. In the post- 9/11 United States, the growth of the national security state has resulted in a growing struggle to maintain the legal and ethical boundaries surrounding executive authority, boundaries that help to define and protect democratic governance. These post-9/11 developments and their effect on the scope of presidential power present hard questions and are fueling today's intense debates among political leaders, citizens, constitutional scholars, historians, and philosophers. This volume will contribute to the public conversation on the nature of executive authority and its relation to the broader topic of sovereignty in several ways. First, readers will learn that the current vital questions surrounding the nature of executive authority and presidential power have their intellectual roots in historical and philosophical writings about the nature of sovereignty. Second, sovereignty has historically been a complicated topic; this volume helps identify the terms of the debate. Third, and most critically, citizens' understanding of the concept of sovereignty is essential to grasping the available options for confronting current challenges to the rule of law in democratic societies. The volume's 15 essays, drawn from among the disciplines of law, political, science, philosophy, and international relations, covers an expansive series of topics, from historical theories and international affairs, to governmental transparency and legitimacy. The volume also focuses on the changes in the concept of sovereignty post-9/11 in the United States and their impact on democracy and the rule of law, particularly in the area of national security practice.

The Civic Constitution provides a compelling case for rethinking the U.S. Constitution. By exploring pivotal struggles over governmental power, individual rights, and the boundaries of citizenship, this book challenges reigning approaches and reveals the profound importance of 'civic founders' who worked to reinvent the constitutional order.