This article analyses the role played by the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice in the dismantling of democracy in Venezuela. The decisions of the Chamber are examined from the standpoint of their impact on the fundamental dimensions of constitutional democracy. For this purpose, the political-institutional context in which the Constitutional Chamber has acted is explained, and the successive packings to which it has been subjected since its installation are highlighted. Its performance is placed in a comparative perspective with respect to other constitutional courts or chambers that have participated in the erosion of democracy and the Rule of Law. All this reveals the key support that the Constitutional Chamber has provided to enhance the governmental power and diminish the political pluralism, at the expense of the counterbalances and institutional controls as well as the fundamental rights. Unlike the views that warn about the authoritarian advance of this Chamber in recent years, after a supposed initial phase of relative independence, this article intends to recognise lines of continuity in the jurisprudence that this Chamber has established since its creation regarding the undermining of constitutional democracy. After confirming the continuity of the authoritarian role of this Chamber, which has shown various facets as the circumstances have demanded, the article also focuses on the conceptual and procedural foundations on which the Constitutional Chamber based itself to fulfil that function. The work concludes reflecting on the task that a new Constitutional Chamber could carry out in a possible scenario of political transition in Venezuela.

This book examines the process of dismantling the democratic institutions and protections in Venezuela under the Hugo Chávez regime. The actions of the Chávez government have influenced similar processes and undemocratic manoeuvrings in Ecuador, Bolivia, and Honduras. Since the election of Hugo Chávez as president of Venezuela in 1998, a sinister form of nationalistic authoritarianism has arisen at the expense of long-established democratic standards. During the past decade, the 1999 Venezuelan Constitution has been systematically attacked by all branches of the Chávez government, particularly by the Supreme Tribunal of Justice, which has legitimized the Chávez-ordered constitutional violations. The Chávez regime has purposely defrauded the Constitution and severely restricted representative government, all in the name of a supposedly participatory democracy controlled by a popularly supported central government. This volume illustrates how an authoritarian, nondemocratic government has been established in Venezuela.

"This book examines the process of dismantling the democratic institutions and protections in Venezuela under the Hugo Chv̀ez regime. The actions of the Chv̀ez government have influenced similar processes and undemocratic maneuverings in Ecuador, Bolivia, and Honduras. Since the election of Hugo Chv̀ez as president of Venezuela in 1998, a sinister form of nationalistic authoritarianism has arisen at the expense of long-established democratic standards. During the past decade, the 1999 Venezuelan Constitution has been systematically attacked by all branches of the Chv̀ez government, particularly by the Supreme Tribunal of Justice, which has legitimized the Chv̀ez-ordered constitutional violations. The Chv̀ez regime has purposely defrauded the Constitution and severely restricted representative government, all in the name of a supposedly participatory democracy controlled by a popularly supported central government. This volume illustrates how an authoritarian, nondemocratic government has been established in Venezuela - a government lacking all the essential elements of a true democracy as defined by the 2001 Inter-American Democratic Charter"--

This book examines the reasoning practice of 15 constitutional courts and supreme courts, including the Caribbean Commonwealth and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. Enriched by empirical data, with which it strives to contribute to a constructive and well-informed debate, the volume analyses how Latin American courts justify their decisions. Based on original data and a region-specific methodology, the book provides a systematic analysis utilising more than 600 leading cases. It shows which interpretive methods and concepts are most favoured by Latin American courts, and which courts were the most prolific in their reasoning activities. The volume traces the features of judicial dialogue on a regional and sub-regional level and enables the evaluation and comparison of each country's reasoning culture in different epochs. The collection includes several graphs to visualise the changes and tendencies of the reasoning practices throughout time in the region, based on information gathered from the dataset. To better understand the current functioning and the future tendencies of courts in Latin America and the Caribbean, the volume illuminates how constitutional and supreme courts have actually been making their decisions in the selected landmark cases, which could also contribute to future successful litigation strategies for both national constitutional courts and the Inter-American Court for Human Rights. This project was made possible due to the collaboration and funding provided by the Rule of Law Programme for Latin America of the Konrad Adenauer Foundation and the Law School of the University of San Francisco de Quito.

Explores a range of anti-constitutionalist populist regimes, identifying and analysing their causes, characteristics and consequences.

Many Europeans struggle to understand where EU-centred Europeanization has led them. The standard response - that their situation is sui generis, one of a kind - no longer holds. Brexit, conflicts over European financial transfers, immigration, or dubious judicial reforms in some Member States demand a more substantial answer. Against that background, The Emergence of European Society Through Public Law: A Hegelian and Anti-Schmittian Approach frames European integration by reconstructing European public law in light of Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU). According to Article 2, all Europeans today are part of one society. European integration may not have produced a European federal state, but it has helped create a European society. This society is intimately interwoven with European public law, as the Treaty characterizes it with 12 constitutional principles. The book interprets this statement as the manifesto, identity, and constitutional core of a democratic society. Thus, Europeans should understand that European integration has ushered in a European democratic society. Comprehensive and engaging, The Emergence of European Society Through Public Law examines the great debates of European public law and presents them in a new and forward-looking reconstruction. This new narrative of European legal integration will appeal to academics and students of EU law, constitutional and comparative law, sociology, political science, and legal history. The Emergence of European Society Through Public Law is an open access title available under the terms of a CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 International licence. It is free to download from OUP and selected open access locations.

Looking beyond Hugo Chávez and the national government, contributors examine forms of democracy involving ordinary Venezuelans: in communal councils, cultural activities, blogs, community media, and other forums.

This landmark volume of specially commissioned, original contributions by top international scholars organizes the issues and controversies of the rich and rapidly maturing field of comparative constitutional law. Divided into sections on constitutional design and redesign, identity, structure, individual rights and state duties, courts and constitutional interpretation, this comprehensive volume covers over 100 countries as well as a range of approaches to the boundaries of constitutional law. While some chapters reference the text of legal instruments expressly labeled constitutional, others focus on the idea of entrenchment or take a more functional approach. Challenging the current boundaries of the field, the contributors offer diverse perspectives - cultural, historical and institutional - as well as suggestions for future research. A unique and enlightening volume, Comparative Constitutional Law is an essential resource for students and scholars of the subject.

Democracies are in danger. Around the world, a rising wave of populist leaders threatens to erode the core structures of democratic self-rule. In the United States, the tenure of Donald Trump has seemed decisive turning point for many. What kind of president intimidates jurors, calls the news media the “enemy of the American people,” and seeks foreign assistance investigating domestic political rivals? Whatever one thinks of President Trump, many think the Constitution will safeguard us from lasting damage. But is that assumption justified? How to Save a Constitutional Democracy mounts an urgent argument that we can no longer afford to be complacent. Drawing on a rich array of other countries’ experiences with democratic backsliding, Tom Ginsburg and Aziz Z. Huq show how constitutional rules can both hinder and hasten the decline of democratic institutions. The checks and balances of the federal government, a robust civil society and media, and individual rights—such as those enshrined in the First Amendment—often fail as bulwarks against democratic decline. The sobering reality for the United States, Ginsburg and Huq contend, is that the Constitution’s design makes democratic erosion more, not less, likely. Its structural rigidity has had unforeseen consequence—leaving the presidency weakly regulated and empowering the Supreme Court conjure up doctrines that ultimately facilitate rather than inhibit rights violations. Even the bright spots in the Constitution—the First Amendment, for example—may have perverse consequences in the hands of a deft communicator who can degrade the public sphere by wielding hateful language banned in many other democracies. We—and the rest of the world—can do better. The authors conclude by laying out practical steps for how laws and constitutional design can play a more positive role in managing the risk of democratic decline.

Freedom in the World, the Freedom House flagship survey whose findings have been published annually since 1972, is the standard-setting comparative assessment of global political rights and civil liberties. The survey ratings and narrative reports on 194 countries and 14 territories are used by policymakers, the media, international corporations, civic activists, and human rights defenders to monitor trends in democracy and track improvements and setbacks in freedom worldwide. The Freedom in the World political rights and civil liberties ratings are determined through a multi-layered process of research and evaluation by a team of regional analysts and eminent scholars. The analysts used a broad range of sources of information, including foreign and domestic news reports, academic studies, nongovernmental organizations, think tanks, individual professional contacts, and visits to the region, in conducting their research. The methodology of the survey is derived in large measure from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and these standards are applied to all countries and territories, irrespective of geographical location, ethnic or religious composition, or level of economic development.