Rechtsvergleichende Verfassungsanalyse, Verfassungstransplantate und vergleichende Verfassungsrechtsprechung. Systematischer Vergleich von Verfassungssystemen, verfassungsrechtlichen Gestaltungsentscheidungen und Verfassungslösungen über verschiedene Rechtstraditionen und politische Systeme hinweg.
For over a decade now, the mainstream liberal discourse, also on the Verfassungsblog, has consisted in the incantation of one mantra: ‘populists’ are destroying ‘the rule of law’. What started as an attempt to describe the post-2011 situation in Hungary has gradually become a conceptual master key or, better yet, a jack-of-all-trades.
Armin von Bogdandy’s article entitled “German Legal Hegemony?” is an invitation to reflect on the paths of European legal scholarship: what are the conditions of the different national legal cultures today, and what are the conditions under which a national legal culture can become hegemonic (or, on the contrary, is it possible for a common tradition to prevail)?
The German legal discourse on Europe solemnly professes the idea of a Europeanized Germany: Kooperation, Verfassungsgerichtsverbund, Europafreundlichkeit, Integrationsverantwortung. However, some cast doubt on these assertions.
What is our new podcast going to be about? What is the concept behind "We need to talk about the rule of law"? What do we want to achieve with this podcast? Why is this urgent? Listen to the Trailer to find out!
Last Tuesday, something rare took place in Westminster. The UK Government officially announced its intention to breach the Withdrawal Agreement that it had signed and ratified a few months ago. Prime Minister Boris Johnson valiantly defended the draft by declaring that such breach is necessary in order ‘to uphold the integrity of the UK, but also to protect the Northern Irish peace process and the Good Friday agreement.’ Is that really so?
In two recent articles, published in English and Portuguese, Professor Bruce Ackerman argued that the roots of Brazil’s political crisis, with the rise of extremist factions to power, is the 1988 Constitution and the presidential system it established. Under Ackerman’s account, the best response to such crisis would be to convene a new Constituent Assembly in 2023 in order to set up a parliamentary system, while also allowing the constituent delegates to “reconsider key decisions by the Assembly of 1988”. In this article, we intend to engage in this debate by explaining why the intent to promulgate a new Constitution might make things even worse.
The recent killings in Delhi, orchestrated by armed mobs with impunity and legitimized through the highest offices of government and the current ruling party, resulted in the death of almost 50 people, mostly Muslims and mostly the poor and vulnerable among them. The sheer scale, design and brutality of the undertaking revived memories of the 2002 Gujarat riots and the 1984 riots in Delhi, that exhibited a certain pattern. That of absolute unrestraint and complicity. Of the state, the executive, the police, the popular media and in many respects the courts as well, in creating and perpetuating a state of terror while fuelling discrimination and disenfranchisement against minorities, especially Muslims.
After three years power-sharing government has returned to Northern Ireland following extensive discussions and the recent publication of a document by the British and Irish governments. It is a lengthy text containing many proposals, plans and initiatives; the relative incoherence is evidence of the conflicting challenges faced. At the core of the dilemma is how to encourage the representatives of the two main communities in Northern Ireland (nationalist-unionist) to share power once again.
In the closing article, Gábor Attila Tóth offers a twofold argument. First, despite all its shortcomings, the 1989 coordinated regime change is a unique success story in the region. It resulted in revolutionary changes in the constitutional system. Second, there is a need again for a peaceful, revolutionary establishment of legitimate government, but without a revolution as such.
The experience of the Central European round tables has no specific relevance today, but it may be significant in the future. Not in a direct way of copying them and it would be unwise to frame any future political consultation as a being inspired by the 1989 round tables. Yet, if we look at the round tables’ essence, negotiating a peaceful transition with an outgoing power, charting a course between legality and legitimacy, the round tables can tell us something of remaining relevance.
13. September 2025
Giovanni Capoccia
12. September 2025
Anne Peters
12. September 2025
Anne Peters