A Christmas Wish
On this crazy year of 2018 and how to move on with the Verfassungsblog project.
Articles for category: English Articles
The Tale of Two Citizenships
August 2018: Two reports make the rounds in Austrian media. One discusses data protection issues for persons on the so-called citizenship “Promi-Liste”. It tells a story of a Chinese investor, who offered a donation to a public university dean in exchange for assistance with receiving the Austrian citizenship. Meanwhile, another paper breaks the news with a related dicey topic: about 70 Austrians have received notice they are to lose their citizenship. The reason? They allegedly reacquired their native Turkish citizenship as evidenced by their alleged participation in a Turkish referendum.
Democratic Decay Resource (DEM-DEC): Fifth Monthly Bibliography Update-December 2018
DEM-DEC Launch Podcast The panel discussion to formally launch DEM-DEC on 22 October was broadcast by ABC Radio National’s ›Big ideas‹ programme on 27 and 28 November and is now available as a podcast. The launch programme and details are on DEM-DEC. The DEM-DEC Bibliography The DEM-DEC Main Bibliography (finalised on 24 June 2018) presents a global range of research on democratic decay. It has a strong focus on research by public lawyers – spanning constitutional, international and transnational law – but also includes key research from other disciplines, as well as policy texts. Updates to the Bibliography are issued ... continue reading
How can a democratic constitution survive an autocratic majority?
Can the democratic constitutions of Hungary and Poland survive an autocratic majority? Hardly. Hungary and Poland seem to be lost for liberal and democratic constitutionalism. At least for the time being, the next question is how democratic constitutionalism can prevent an autocratic majority. The task is to make it difficult for an autocratic parliamentary majority to capture the institutions of critique and control of government and to undermine separation of powers.
No Case for Legal Interventionism: Defending Democracy Through Protecting Pluralism and Parliamentarism
Being a democrat means accepting that the law is not a very durable sword against authoritarianism. Democratic law bends and submits to the majority. When push comes to shove, it lacks the capacity to defy anti-democratic, authoritarian majorities. Of course, this does not mean that legal mechanisms and instruments are meaningless in this context. They can work against and impede the rise of anti-pluralist, illiberal and anti-democratic political movements. But it is important to acknowledge that legal interventions and prohibitive measures that target anti-liberal, anti-democratic political platforms also pose risks. They may undermine what they are supposed to protect: a free and egalitarian political process that is based on open political competition, pluralism and a free public discourse.
The Strange Case of the Publicity of the Brexit Legal Advice
One of the most remarkable episodes of the most remarkable Brexit saga is the strange case of the publicity of the Brexit legal advice. The actions of Theresa May’s government seem to aim at reducing both popular and democratic sovereignty to an empty shell before the incumbent Prime Minister and her cabinet are kicked out of power. However, the case of the publicity of legal advice is indeed strange not only on account of what has transpired on the British isles, but also of what has not happened on the continent.
Combatting TINA-Rhetoric through Judicial Review: Dealing with Pay Cuts in Times of Financial Consolidation
Recently, the German Federal Constitutional Court has decided that certain cuts on wages for civil servants in the Land Baden-Württemberg are unconstitutional. The judgment establishes a constitutional answer to the so-called “there is no alternative” (TINA) rhetoric that has largely dominated the political discourse on budgetary consolidation in the past. From this perspective, this line of jurisprudence allows for opening up a political and constitutional discourse that has become somewhat colonized by purely economic and financial considerations.
Constitutional Resilience to Populism: Four Theses
Let us make a plea for modesty. Constitutional democrats need to be clear-eyed and realistic about what good constitutional design can do. We need to steer a middle course between constitutional idealism and nihilism. Constitutional idealists argue that thoughtful and intelligent constitutional design can largely eliminate the risk posed by populism; constitutional nihilists respond by arguing that there is little, if anything, that constitutional design can do in the face of the populist challenge that secures victory at the ballot box and captures the state from within.
Sovereign Choices: The CJEU’s Ruling on Exit from Brexit
In today’s Wightman judgment, the CJEU has ruled that a Member State may unilaterally revoke its notified intention to withdraw from the EU prior to that withdrawal taking effect. The Court is clearly signalling that membership of the European Union, and the rights and responsibilities which come with it, is voluntary. As political messages go, that is a pretty big message.
How to Abolish Democracy: Electoral System, Party Regulation and Opposition Rights in Hungary and Poland
When it comes to Poland and Hungary, everyone is talking about the judiciary, about the independence of the courts, about the rule of law. But hardly anyone talks about parliaments. Yet they are at the heart of our democracies. And they are no less at risk. This became clear in the third panel of our workshop, which dealt with the electoral system, party regulation and opposition rights in Hungary and Poland. What may sound technical at first glance are surprisingly effective instruments in the hands of autocrats. It is precisely with these instruments that the governments of both countries have set the course for a “democracy” that primarily benefits the ruling parties and undermines political plurality.
