Abstract
One key notion in the post-sovereign paradigm of constitution-making is the idea of ‘legal continuity’. In The Adventures of the Constituent Power: Beyond Revolutions?, Andrew Arato states that this paradigm emerges from an ‘empirical pattern’ marked by legal continuity throughout transitions from old legal systems to new ones. This would imply that it is possible to conceive of a ‘constituent power’ under the law, i.e., without producing legal ruptures. In this work, I will show that there are three problems concerning the idea of ‘legal continuity’ in this context: 1) a contingent obstacle for legal continuity in a ‘strong’ sense; 2) some conceptual uncertainties regarding the scope of the constitutional amendment power; and, 3) a conceptual inconsistency in the results of this legal continuity, related to the effective emergence of a new legal order.
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 callDisclaimer: 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.
