Search

Democratic constitution-making theory emphasizes the importance of direct and indirect participation of the people in the constitution-making process and maintain that the decisive influence of the people would most probably ensure the social legitimacy and longevity of a constitution. In addition, the theory argues that participation in such process would bring about a gradual decrease in the prevailing social cleavages and promote a common future ideal for each member of the society. Chile stands out as the most recent proving ground of this theory in recent years. As a matter of fact, the Country experienced a highly transparent and participatory constitution-making process via a constituent assembly, following the transition to democracy after long years of authoritarian rule. However, to many observers’ surprise, the draft constitution was rejected by a landslide majority. This represents not only a political crisis in Chile, but also a moment of crisis for the democratic constitution-making theory. In this study, the recent developments in Chile are scrutinized and the potential deficiencies of the process-oriented constitution making are discussed under four sections namely, problems of participation and inclusiveness, negative reflections of the participatory constitution-making process on the constitution, and the media and communication aspect of such process. Finally, fundamental assumptions of the democratic constitution-making theory are tested in the light of Chilean experience, and it is stated that the theory produces somewhat inconsistent results as seen through the lenses of the inductive method of legal studies and the deductive method of political science. Realizing that the theory fails to provide an absolute explanatory power on the 19th century constitutionalism, as well as several constitution-making experiments of the 20th and 21st centuries, “contingency” approach is proposed to support the validity of the theory.

Anayasalar, hukukî işlevlerine ek olarak çeşitli siyasî işlevleri de bulunan temel belgelerdir. Bu bağlamda, anayasaların siyasî işlevlerinin en başta geleni; siyasî entegrasyon işlevidir. Bu çerçevede anayasaların siyasî entegrasyon işlevi; toplumda var olan tüm görüş farklılıklarını ve çıkar çatışmalarını aşan, toplumsal yaşamın devamı için gereken asgarî uyum ortamını yaratan ve bu yolla da belli bir siyasa altında yaşayan insanların kolektif kimliğini oluşturan ve onları bir arada tutan hukuk ötesi bir işlev olarak tanımlanabilir. Modern anayasalar, ortaya çıkış yüzyılları itibariyle ulus-devletler çağının ürünleri oldukları için, bugüne kadar söz konusu işlevi hep ulusal düzeyde gerçekleştirmişlerdir. Bu gelişmenin en büyük istisnası ise, ulusüstü bir anayasacılık denemesi olan “Avrupa Birliği Anayasası” girişimidir. Bu çalışmada, öncelikle söz konusu girişimin ortaya çıkışı, somutlaşması ve başarısızlığa uğraması süreçlerine yakından bakılmakta; sonrasında ise anılan girişimin altında yatan dinamiklerin, anayasaların siyasî entegrasyon işlevi temelinde açıklanabileceği ileri sürülmektedir. Çalışma, ulusaltı, ulusal ve ulusüstü düzeylerde ortaya çıkan yeni krizlerin de etkisiyle, önümüzdeki yıllarda, anayasaların her düzeydeki siyasî entegrasyonun gücünün ve işlevinin yeniden ve sıklıkla tartışılacağı öngörüsüyle noktalanmaktadır., Constitutions are fundamental documents having political, as well as legal functions. In this respect, one of the most prominent functions of constitutions is their (political) integrative function. As such, constitutions help to develop an overarching identity that would remain above the plurality of opinions and interests that exist within a society and develop a communal spirit and a collective identity which, in return, would develop a minimum social cohesion that is required to maintain a functioning social order. Modern constitutions, being products of the nation-state era, have thus far delivered such function at the national level. The biggest exception to this rule is the “Constitution of the European Union”, being an initiative at the supranational level. In this study, the emergence and the failure of such initiative is examined, followed by an explanation of the underlying dynamics with reference to the integrative function of constitutions. The article concludes with the prediction that, under the continuing pressure coming from several crisis at the subnational, national and supranational levels, integrative function of the constitutions will remain its place at the top of the agenda in all those respective domains.

Kırılgan demokrasiler, demokratik pekişmişlik seviyesi veya demokrasinin farklı kurumsal görünümleri esas alınarak yapılan sınıflandırmalardan tümüyle bağımsız; bu sınıflandırmalarda işaret edilen modellerin hepsiyle iç içe geçebilen bir “ideal tip” kavramlaştırmasıdır. Bu kavramın işaret ettiği sorunlar, anayasal değerler ekseninde yaşanan ve siyasal örgütlenme özgürlüğü kanallarıyla açığa vurulan özgün bir çatışmadan kaynaklanmakta ve bu çatışma türü, 21. yüzyılın başlıca sorun alanlarından biri olarak tespit edilmektedir. Çalışmada, özellikle kırılgan demokrasi kavramının “sınır aşan” (cross-cutting) niteliği, Fragile democracy is an “ideal type” in the Weberian sense, totally independent of classifications based on the level of consolidation of democracies and classifications based on institutional choices. In this sense, it is able to coexist with any of these models. The problems indicated by such a concept include a certain type of conflict in constitutional values, which reveals itself by means of the freedom of political association. In this article, this conflict is regarded as one of the biggest problems of the 21st Century. Consequently, special emphasis is put on the “cross-cutting” nature of the concept, arguing that even the most established and stable democracies of the advanced welfare societies, i.e. Belgium, are not exempt from such a conflict. The conclusion states that reflecting on these issues will be one of the fundamental challenges that lie ahead for the constitutional lawyers in the near future