Deliberativity and aleatory procedures as a legitimation of somatic human rights: experience of the Republic of Ireland and the Commonwealth of Australia

Abstract

The article demonstrates the importance of deliberative institutions and procedures in constitutional politics, on the example of the regulation of somatic and genetic human rights. The article identifies the relationship between the effectiveness of legal regulation and deliberative communication in the context of the “juridification of society”. The methodological foundations of deliberative procedures are revealed. In this work, we analyze the reasons for the development of deliberative procedures in the context of biopolitics. Particular attention is paid to the process of expanding the scope of legal regulation in the information state, and we have shown the historical process of increasing relations regulated by law. The authors illustrate the specifics of the legitimation of somatic human rights in a modern state and explore the current procedures for the legitimation of law. A comparative legal analysis of the deliberation principle in the adoption to public law decisions and the achievement of public consensus is given. The authors also assess the degree of significance of aleatory procedures, examining for this purpose the process of constitutional novelization on the example of amending national constitutions (for example, the Constitutions of the Republic of Ireland and the Commonwealth of Australia). This research also shows the effectiveness of certain aleatory procedures with the participation of randomly selected citizens, among them special attention is paid to the so-called “civil assemblies” and “citizens’ jury”. Such aleatory institutional forms are assessed as an important condition for the legitimacy and effectiveness of constitutional reforms.