The (Not So Hidden) Elephant in the Room: Confronting International Constitution-Making's Eurocentric Gaze

Anna Saunders's article, “Constitution-Making as a Technique of International Law: Reconsidering the Post-war Inheritance,” is an important addition to the literature that problematizes the idea of international constitution-making. At the heart of Saunders's critique of international constitution making—defined as the involvement of international institutions in national constitution-making processes—is the point that the parameters of what constitutes “local ownership” of the constitution-making process is detached from debates on rethinking neoliberal economic structures and material interests. As a result, constitutions in post-conflict societies fail to speak to the socio-economic realities of a people and, most importantly, diminish their agency to envision alternatives. Saunders offers a detailed historical account of why such failure, or what she refers to as “selective technicity,” has become standard practice, and then goes further to stress the imperative of reimagining the vocabulary of what constitutes “local ownership” in the context of meaningful societal transformation. In this essay, I extend Saunders's thesis to argue that if the international constitution-making process does not shed its Eurocentric gaze, we will be unable to proffer sustainable suggestions to make the process responsive to the realities of a people.