Constitution-making by elected assemblies in Southern Europe during the nineteenth century

Q2 Arts and Humanities Parliaments, Estates and Representation Pub Date : 2022-05-04 DOI:10.1080/02606755.2022.2084295
K. Chrysogonos
{"title":"Constitution-making by elected assemblies in Southern Europe during the nineteenth century","authors":"K. Chrysogonos","doi":"10.1080/02606755.2022.2084295","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The aim of this article is to examine whether the specific method of constitution-making in Southern Europe during the nineteenth century, and in particular the entanglement of an elected assembly with it, played any role in its outcome. The conclusion, based on a country-by-country report, is that the methods of constitution-making oscillated between royal concession, co-operation between the monarch and an elected assembly, and enactment of a fundamental law by an assembly alone. The participation of an elected assembly would frequently result in a document somewhat more liberal and more democratic than in the case of fundamental laws conceded by the monarch. However, the differences were not huge. Constitutions made by an assembly seem furthermore to have fared on average somewhat better than conceded constitutions, as far as their endurance is concerned. Concession and contract were however gradually falling into disuse as methods of constitution-making, ceding their place to (constituent) assemblies on a Pan-European scale. Since consent is obviously inscribed in the genome of constitutionalism as the fundamental organizational principle of society, it is to be expected that the symbolic foundation of a political community will be laid through the institutionalized consent of the members of this community.","PeriodicalId":53586,"journal":{"name":"Parliaments, Estates and Representation","volume":"64 1","pages":"109 - 121"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Parliaments, Estates and Representation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02606755.2022.2084295","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT The aim of this article is to examine whether the specific method of constitution-making in Southern Europe during the nineteenth century, and in particular the entanglement of an elected assembly with it, played any role in its outcome. The conclusion, based on a country-by-country report, is that the methods of constitution-making oscillated between royal concession, co-operation between the monarch and an elected assembly, and enactment of a fundamental law by an assembly alone. The participation of an elected assembly would frequently result in a document somewhat more liberal and more democratic than in the case of fundamental laws conceded by the monarch. However, the differences were not huge. Constitutions made by an assembly seem furthermore to have fared on average somewhat better than conceded constitutions, as far as their endurance is concerned. Concession and contract were however gradually falling into disuse as methods of constitution-making, ceding their place to (constituent) assemblies on a Pan-European scale. Since consent is obviously inscribed in the genome of constitutionalism as the fundamental organizational principle of society, it is to be expected that the symbolic foundation of a political community will be laid through the institutionalized consent of the members of this community.
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
十九世纪南欧由选举产生的议会制定的宪法
摘要本文旨在探讨19世纪南欧的制宪方法,特别是选举议会的纠缠,是否在制宪结果中发挥了作用。根据一份各国报告得出的结论是,制宪方法在王室让步、君主与选举产生的议会合作以及议会单独制定基本法律之间摇摆不定。选举产生的议会的参与通常会产生一份文件,比君主承认的基本法律更自由,更民主。然而,差异并不大。此外,就其持久性而言,由议会制定的宪法似乎比被承认的宪法平均要好一些。然而,作为制宪方法的租界和契约逐渐被废弃,让位给泛欧洲范围内的(制宪)议会。既然同意作为社会的基本组织原则,显然铭刻在宪政的基因组中,那么可以预期,一个政治共同体的象征基础将通过这个共同体成员的制度化同意来奠定。
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
Parliaments, Estates and Representation
Parliaments, Estates and Representation Social Sciences-Sociology and Political Science
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
28
期刊最新文献
Interpreting multilateral diplomacy in the Indonesian Parliament’s debates on climate crisis and sustainability Red star over the Baltic: the sovietisation of representative assemblies in Poland's ‘Recovered Territories’ via the ‘three times “Yes”’ referendum of 1946 Importable or exceptional? Swiss direct-democratic instruments in the French and German Parliaments, 2000–19 The Portuguese customary electoral constitution: the election of representatives to the ancient cortes The German Parliament and the political crisis of 1917–18: the role of the Intergroup Commission
×
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