06 November 2016
Who Speaks in the Name of the People? Â
The practice of using a referendum to justify the power of the executive has been used and abused throughout history. Napoleon who ruled like a plebiscitarian monarch can serve as the best counter example for contemporary liberal democratic regimes. All the institutions of the government, the executive, the parliament and the judiciary speak in the name of the people in our conception of the western democratic constitutionalism. It is only thanks to the checks and balances that the separation of powers provides in a conception of collaborative constitutionalism that we can avoid practices of misusing references to a supposed democratic legitimacy in view of derailing the operations of the government in a direction that is entirely out of control of democracy itself. Continue reading >>
0 
10 October 2016
Das gescheiterte Referendum zum Friedensvertrag in Kolumbien taugt nicht zur Delegitimierung von Volksabstimmungen
Brexit in UK, Ukraine-Abkommen in den Niederlanden, Flüchtlinge in Ungarn: Volksabstimmungen scheinen in letzter Zeit nichts als schlechte Nachrichten zu produzieren. Jetzt kommt das gescheiterte Friedens-Referendum in Kolumbien dazu. Ist das ein Grund, Volksabstimmungen generell zu misstrauen? Nicht, wenn man genauer hinschaut. Continue reading >>04 October 2016
The Invalid Anti-Migrant Referendum in Hungary
After an unprecedented and partially illegal attempt to bring Hungarian voters in line against the EU refugee quota, the referendum launched by the government is invalid, as only around 40 percent turned out to vote. This was an own goal made by the Orbán government, which after overthrowing its predecessor as a result of a popular referendum made it more difficult to initiate a valid referendum. Continue reading >>30 September 2016
Warum das Flüchtlingsquoten-Referendum in Ungarn so eine erzfaule Sache ist
Von seinem Volk will Viktor Orbán wissen, ob sie die EU-Flüchtlingsquoten gut finden. Das sieht demokratisch aus, ist in Wahrheit aber genau das Gegenteil. Continue reading >>11 July 2016
Das Brexit-Referendum: Sieg für die Demokratie?
War das Referendum doch zumindest ein Sieg für die Demokratie? Im Ergebnis wohl nicht. Demokratietheoretisch darf die Kritik freilich nicht beim Ergebnis, sondern bei der Entscheidung für das Referendum ansetzen: War die Austrittsfrage eine für ein Referendum geeignete Frage, oder hätte diese dem Parlament vorbehalten sein müssen? Vieles spricht hier für Letzteres. Continue reading >>06 July 2016
Calling Europe into Question: the British and the Greek referenda
On this day last year, Greeks woke up facing a referendum result that very few had expected. Almost a year later, on the 24th of June 2016, British and other Europeans woke up overwhelmingly surprised by the ‘Leave’ vote. Despite their significant differences, the Greek and the British referenda have some important things in common. Reading them together might have something to teach us about referenda on the EU—especially now that more people seem to be asking for one in their own country. Continue reading >>06 July 2016
Brexit and Art. 50: the Key lies in Luxembourg
A large British law firm has announced legal steps to ensure that the Art. 50 TEU procedure leading to EUV will be triggered by the British parliament. This might lead to a referral to the European Court of Justice. Continue reading >>29 June 2016
Sovereign and misinformed: Brexit as an exercise in democracy?
Rather than criticising the Brexit referendum as a decision-making tool because ‘the people’ don’t have the necessary expertise to take decisions of this magnitude, we should question the conditions in which many UK voters were called to express their opinion. They, like many all over the world, have seen the progressive hollowing-out of those basic rights that make voting the expression of the right to individual and collective self-rule in the first place. Continue reading >>27 June 2016
A Disunited Kingdom: two Nations in, two Nations out
The United Kingdom is not a centralised state. It is a ‘family of nations’. There is a strong case for arguing that the referendum carries only if a majority of voters in all four nations respectively give their backing. England and Wales voted to leave, but Scotland and Northern Ireland voted to remain. Recognising that split is not a matter of shifting the goalposts after the fact. It is about respecting an established, indeed a compelling constitutional order. Continue reading >>
0
26 June 2016