Abstract
The article examines the viability and the desirability of the use of constitutional grammar on the global plane. It asks whether global constitutionalism is a viable and/or desirable concept that should be theoretically (and later practically) invested in to know and to understand better the phenomenon of global law as well as, potentially, to come up with normatively advantageous outcomes. The argument is broken down into three parts. The first conceptual part contains a study of the conventional meaning of constitutionalism and global law. This is followed by an examination of the descriptive, explanatory and normative fit between the two phenomena. The final part passes a verdict on the viability and desirability question. It is argued that constitutionalism is only a part of the grammar of global law, its morphology, while principled legal pluralism acts as its syntax.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Kritische Vierteljahresschrift für Gesetzgebung und Rechtswissenschaft
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
