Consitutional failure or constitutional odissey?: What can we learn from comparative law?

• Autores: Giuseppe Martinico
• Localización: Perspectives on Federalism, ISSN-e 2036-5438, Vol. 3, Nº. 1, 2011
• Idioma: inglés
• Enlaces
  • Texto Completo Ejemplar
• Dialnet Métricas: 1 Cita
• Resumen

  • According to many scholars, the rejection of the Constitutional Treaty and the disappointment caused by the contents of the Lisbon Treaty –- defined by Somek (2007) as a mere post-Constitutional Treaty – mark the failure of any possible constitutional ambition for the European Union (EU). This point can be challenged both from a theoretical point of view – by describing the EU as an example of “evolutionary constitutionalism” – and a pragmatic one (i.e., looking at the functioning of concrete constitutional experiences), I will focus my paper on this second point, insisting on comparative argument. The research question of this work is: Can we compare the “constitutional crisis” of the EU to the constitutional difficulties encountered by other multinational experiences? My idea is that the latest attempts at amending the EU treaties – the period of the “Conventions” – can be traced back to the genus of mega-constitutional politics and starting from this parallelism I argue that the so-called constitutional “failure” of the EU is actually a confirmation of the current constitutional nature of the EU rather than the proof of the impossibility of transplanting the constitutional discourse to the EU level.