Political Parties in Constitutional Theory

IF 1.4 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW Current Legal Problems Pub Date : 2019-11-24 DOI:10.2139/ssrn.3492467
Tarunabh Khaitan
{"title":"Political Parties in Constitutional Theory","authors":"Tarunabh Khaitan","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3492467","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this paper, I first provide an idealized functional account of political parties and party systems. I argue that parties are difficult to regulate constitutionally because of their Janus-faced public-private character. The key function they perform, when functioning as they ought to function, is to facilitate a mutually responsive relationship between public policy and popular opinion by acting as an intermediary between a state and its people. They perform this intermediary function in a unique manner, because of their bi-directionality and their plenary character. When they perform this function effectively, political parties significantly reduce four key information and transaction costs which would otherwise make democratic governance impossible: political participation costs, voters’ information costs, policy packaging costs, and ally prediction costs. This idealised account helps us identify pathological parties and party-systems and ground four principles that constitutions should seek to optimise in relation to political parties. \n \nThe second part of this paper outlines and defends these four principles. Here I argue that state constitutions: \ni. should guarantee maximum autonomy for the formation, organisation, and operation of political parties, moderated by the restrictions necessitated by their purpose of winning (a share in) state power (for fixed terms) in competitive elections by acting as intermediaries between the state and its people (the ‘purposive autonomy principle’); \nii. should try to optimise the party system such that the total number of serious political parties is large enough to broadly represent every major ‘voter type’, but not so large that the information costs on judicious voters are too high (the ‘party system optimality principle’); \niii. should ensure a separation of parties and the state (the ‘party-state separation principle’); and \niv. should discourage the factionalization of political parties (the ‘anti-faction principle’). \n \nThese political principles are drawn from the value of democracy itself. They are likely to bring real world political parties and party systems closer to their idealised form, thereby improving and deepening democratic governance. As such, they should—alongside other relevant political and constitutional norms—inform fundamental constitutional design choices.","PeriodicalId":45282,"journal":{"name":"Current Legal Problems","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2019-11-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Legal Problems","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3492467","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

In this paper, I first provide an idealized functional account of political parties and party systems. I argue that parties are difficult to regulate constitutionally because of their Janus-faced public-private character. The key function they perform, when functioning as they ought to function, is to facilitate a mutually responsive relationship between public policy and popular opinion by acting as an intermediary between a state and its people. They perform this intermediary function in a unique manner, because of their bi-directionality and their plenary character. When they perform this function effectively, political parties significantly reduce four key information and transaction costs which would otherwise make democratic governance impossible: political participation costs, voters’ information costs, policy packaging costs, and ally prediction costs. This idealised account helps us identify pathological parties and party-systems and ground four principles that constitutions should seek to optimise in relation to political parties. The second part of this paper outlines and defends these four principles. Here I argue that state constitutions: i. should guarantee maximum autonomy for the formation, organisation, and operation of political parties, moderated by the restrictions necessitated by their purpose of winning (a share in) state power (for fixed terms) in competitive elections by acting as intermediaries between the state and its people (the ‘purposive autonomy principle’); ii. should try to optimise the party system such that the total number of serious political parties is large enough to broadly represent every major ‘voter type’, but not so large that the information costs on judicious voters are too high (the ‘party system optimality principle’); iii. should ensure a separation of parties and the state (the ‘party-state separation principle’); and iv. should discourage the factionalization of political parties (the ‘anti-faction principle’). These political principles are drawn from the value of democracy itself. They are likely to bring real world political parties and party systems closer to their idealised form, thereby improving and deepening democratic governance. As such, they should—alongside other relevant political and constitutional norms—inform fundamental constitutional design choices.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
宪政理论中的政党
在本文中,我首先对政党和政党制度进行了理想化的功能描述。我认为,政党很难从宪法上进行监管,因为它们具有Janus面临的公私性质。当它们发挥应有的作用时,它们所发挥的关键作用是通过充当国家和人民之间的中介,促进公共政策和民意之间的相互回应关系。由于它们的双向性和全体性,它们以一种独特的方式履行着这种中介功能。当政党有效履行这一职能时,它们会显著降低四个关键的信息和交易成本,否则这四个成本将使民主治理变得不可能:政治参与成本、选民信息成本、政策包装成本和盟友预测成本。这种理想化的描述有助于我们识别病态的政党和政党制度,并为宪法应寻求优化的四项原则奠定基础。本文的第二部分概述并捍卫了这四个原则。在这里,我认为州宪法:I.应保证政党的组建、组织和运作具有最大的自主权,并受到其在竞争性选举中通过充当国家和人民之间的中间人来赢得(在固定任期内)国家权力(份额)所需的限制(“有目的的自治原则”);ii。应努力优化政党制度,使严肃政党的总数足够大,可以广泛代表每一种主要的“选民类型”,但不要太大,以至于明智选民的信息成本过高(“政党制度最优原则”);iii.应确保党和国家的分离(“党和国家分离原则”);四应阻止政党派系化(“反派系原则”)。这些政治原则源于民主本身的价值。它们可能会使现实世界的政党和政党制度更接近其理想化的形式,从而改善和深化民主治理。因此,它们应该与其他相关的政治和宪法规范一起,为基本的宪法设计选择提供信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
期刊介绍: The lectures are public, delivered on a weekly basis and chaired by members of the judiciary. CLP features scholarly articles that offer a critical analysis of important current legal issues. It covers all areas of legal scholarship and features a wide range of methodological approaches to law.
期刊最新文献
Interpreting the Paris Agreement in its Normative Environment Religious Expression and Exemptions in the Private Sector Workplace: Spotting Bias Contracting in the Public Interest? Re-examining the Role of Planning Obligations in Contemporary Town Planning Processes Atrocity’s Glass Booth The Challenges of Designing Sexual Assault Law
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1