{"title":"Direct democracy in the constitution: good or bad for democracy?","authors":"J. But, D. Jongkind, W. Voermans","doi":"10.1080/20508840.2022.2131150","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Concerns about democratic decline and deficit have recently led to repeated calls for institutional changes that could enhance civil participation and direct voter participation in public decision-making (forms of direct democracy). An evergreen among the instruments proposed is the referendum, and in particular the constitutionally embedded referendum. This would grant a constitutional right to trigger a referendum and is something that is currently under consideration in the Netherlands. It is often assumed that constitutionally embedded referendums can correct systemic flaws in a representative democratic system, thus enhancing the overall democratic score of a country. This contribution considers these premises. By means of an empirical study, it examines whether the democracy index score of a country is related to constitutionally ratified rights to direct legislative influence of citizens, such as referendums and legislative initiatives by citizens. The initial results indicate that codifying referendum procedures as a constitutional right does indeed positively relate to the democratic scores of countries worldwide. This effect, however, does not hold true for the sample of EU countries studied.","PeriodicalId":42455,"journal":{"name":"Theory and Practice of Legislation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Theory and Practice of Legislation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20508840.2022.2131150","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
ABSTRACT Concerns about democratic decline and deficit have recently led to repeated calls for institutional changes that could enhance civil participation and direct voter participation in public decision-making (forms of direct democracy). An evergreen among the instruments proposed is the referendum, and in particular the constitutionally embedded referendum. This would grant a constitutional right to trigger a referendum and is something that is currently under consideration in the Netherlands. It is often assumed that constitutionally embedded referendums can correct systemic flaws in a representative democratic system, thus enhancing the overall democratic score of a country. This contribution considers these premises. By means of an empirical study, it examines whether the democracy index score of a country is related to constitutionally ratified rights to direct legislative influence of citizens, such as referendums and legislative initiatives by citizens. The initial results indicate that codifying referendum procedures as a constitutional right does indeed positively relate to the democratic scores of countries worldwide. This effect, however, does not hold true for the sample of EU countries studied.
期刊介绍:
The Theory and Practice of Legislation aims to offer an international and interdisciplinary forum for the examination of legislation. The focus of the journal, which succeeds the former title Legisprudence, remains with legislation in its broadest sense. Legislation is seen as both process and product, reflection of theoretical assumptions and a skill. The journal addresses formal legislation, and its alternatives (such as covenants, regulation by non-state actors etc.). The editors welcome articles on systematic (as opposed to historical) issues, including drafting techniques, the introduction of open standards, evidence-based drafting, pre- and post-legislative scrutiny for effectiveness and efficiency, the utility and necessity of codification, IT in legislation, the legitimacy of legislation in view of fundamental principles and rights, law and language, and the link between legislator and judge. Comparative and interdisciplinary approaches are encouraged. But dogmatic descriptions of positive law are outside the scope of the journal. The journal offers a combination of themed issues and general issues. All articles are submitted to double blind review.