Abstract
Traditionally constitutional theory has relied on two central distinctions: The public/private and the national/transnational distinction. The societal developments of the past decades have however led to an increased erosion of these distinctions. In the academic literature, this development have both been regarded a indicating a triumph as well as a failure of constitutionalism. This article circumvents this standoff by questioning the very foundation of constitutional theory in the public/private and the national/transnational distinctions. It is argued that the object of constitutions is formal organisations as such and not the particular type of formal organisation which is associated with statehood. Thus, they can be public or private, national or transnational. On this background, a distinction is introduced between the internal setup of constitutional orders, the external strive for compatibility between orders through constitutionalisation and the idea of constitutionalism as a way of approaching the future.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Publication date | 2014 |
Number of pages | 20 |
Publication status | Published - 2014 |
Event | Constitutionalism(s) post 2008: Modern Law Review Seminar - Warwick University, Warwick, United Kingdom Duration: 27 Jun 2014 → 27 Jun 2014 http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/law/research/events/conferences/mlr/ |
Seminar
Seminar | Constitutionalism(s) post 2008 |
---|---|
Location | Warwick University |
Country/Territory | United Kingdom |
City | Warwick |
Period | 27/06/2014 → 27/06/2014 |
Internet address |