A problem or a solution? The referendum as a mechanism for citizens' participation in constitution-making (original) (raw)

Referendums and Democratic Constitutionalism: Is There a Way for Reconciliation?

Populism and Democracy Eds.:Sascha Hardt, Aalt Willem Heringa, Hoai-Thu Nguyen, 2020

The guiding question for this chapter is whether there is a way to save referendums from populist manipulation. For this purpose, Part I will provide a brief introductory note on the relationship between populism and referendums. In fact, legal doctrine and practice have always discerned “good practices” from bad ones – or, put differently –democratic referendums from non-democratic ones. Keeping this in mind, Part II will offer a definition of the concept of “authoritarian referendum” and a historical account of authoritarian referendums, particularly in France under Napoleon(s) and in Hitler’s Germany. Finally, Part III will discuss, a contrario the authoritarian referendums, that there are emerging standards of democratic (good) referendums in comparative constitutional law and international documents; and a synthesis of these standards may be taken as a guideline in the path of securing a pluralist and democratic system of referendum.

Constitutional referendums and deliberation

Deliberative Constitution-making. Opportunities and Challenges , 2023

Constitutional referendums are important instruments at the end of numerous constitutional review processes. In recent years, these referendums are combined with deliberative instruments such as open forums, stakeholder conferences, and citizen assemblies. Constitutional referendums are also used in modern authoritarian regimes to strengthen the base of legitimacy of incumbent presidents. In the new Direct Democracy Integrity Index, experts evaluate the integrity in the different phases of the referendum cycle. In this index, citizen participation is one aspect in the pre-referendum phase. In this article, the Turkish constitutional referendum in 2017, and the Russian and Italian constitutional referendums in 2020 were analysed. The expert survey showed that referendums in the authoritarian regimes in Turkey and Russia have deficits of integrity in the pre-referendum phase. Authoritarian referendums often include symbolic outreach programmes and constitutional deliberation. But these crowdsourced constitutional processes are characterized by integrity insufficiencies. Nevertheless, the Italian referendum also lacks broad participatory instruments.

Research Note: Are Referendums Controlled and Pro-hegemonic?

Political Studies, 2000

Are most referendums controlled and pro-hegemonic, i.e. do governments only submit issues to referendums if they are certain that they will win (as asserted by Lijphart, Butler and Ranney)? This paper shows conclusively that the constitutional referendums in Western polities have performed the functions of constitutional safeguards, and that the governments have been unsuccessful in their attempts to control the referendum.

Explaining the Paradox of Plebiscites

Government and Opposition

Recent referendums show that autocratic regimes consult voters even if the outcome is a foregone conclusion. They have been doing so with increasing frequency since Napoleon consulted French citizens in 1800. Why and when do dictatorial regimes hold referendums they are certain they will win? Analysing the 162 referendums held in autocratic and non-free states in the period 1800–2012, the article shows that referendums with a 99% yes-vote tend to occur in autocracies with high ethnic fractionalization and, in part, in sultanistic (tinpot or tyrannical) regimes, but generally not in communist (totalitarian) states. An explanation is proposed for this variation.