Three Fallacies Undermining Participatory Constitution Making

• Published in: PS: Political Science & Politics
• Main Author: Welp, Yanina
• Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
• Language: English
• Published: Cambridge University Press (CUP) 2024
• Subjects: Iceland
• Online Access: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1049096523000896; https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/S1049096523000896

In recent years, many emerging actors (e.g., new social movements and parties) associate democratic problems with representative institutions. Accordingly, as a solution, they propose to introduce direct citizen participation in constitution and law making. However, three fallacies undermine the potential benefits of citizen participation: (1) attributing a moral and/or epistemic superiority to “the people”; (2) assuming that superiority, expecting to replace representation with direct participation; and (3) supposing that the legitimacy deficit will be resolved automatically by introducing inclusive direct participation. This article argues against these three ideas by providing a framework to understand participatory constitution making and briefly examining the cases of Chile and Iceland.