Constitutionalism-bashing has been en vogue for some time in international legal scholarship. International legal scholars have deployed an incredible amount of energy to discredit any pattern of argument, structure of thought, or conceptual framework that comes with constitutionalist overtones. In many respects, such anti-constitutionalist fury among international lawyers is rather bewildering given the inflated importance and weight granted to international legal constitutionalism on these occasions. Such ferocity is also questionable in the light of the reasonable awareness by most constitutionalist thinkers of the limits of their projects. What is more, variants of constitutionalism are so numerous that it is not sure that the idea really means the same for all those who are determined to repudiate it. It is against this backdrop that this chapter ventures into the origins and causes of international lawyers’ unbridled furry against what seems a rather marginal movement in international legal thought. This chapter particularly makes the argument that it is the attachment to some legal forms that has fuelled the passionate crusade against constitutionalism and that contemporary debates on international constitutionalism are nothing more than the continuation of a more fundamental discussion on the concept of international law.
Tuesday, September 13, 2016
d'Aspremont: International Legal Constitutionalism, Legal Forms, and the Need for Villains
Jean d'Aspremont (Univ. of Manchester - Law; Univ. of Amsterdam - Law) has posted International Legal Constitutionalism, Legal Forms, and the Need for Villains (in Handbook on Global Constitutionalism, A. Lang & A. Weiner eds., forthcoming). Here's the abstract: