The Law and Politics of Secession: From the Political Contingency of Secession to a “Right to Decide”? Can Lessons Be Learned from the Quebec Case?

Gaudreault-DesBiens, Jean-François

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-03469-6_3

Cited by 18 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In this sense, "[c]larity involves using words that are known to one's audience and matching delivery to the intended meaning". 21 Whether by failing to choose a specific enough wording by accident or through deliberate obfuscation, 22 a badly worded question is not sufficiently understandable and is thus not clear.…”

Section:  Clarity: a Precondition Internal To Referendumsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While its legitimacy dovetails a widely recognised judicial ruling that makes it "difficult in the future for secessionist leaders in Quebec to ignore" it, 101 Quebec enacted its own Act Respecting the Fundamental Rights and Prerogatives of the Québec People and the Québec State. 102 Neither of the two has established a process that may lead to a completely clear outcome in the case of Québec's self-determination. 103 Thus, again, the referendum was used to project a form of clarity that remains in dispute, with the image it provided unable to set aside political heterogeneity and unpredictability.…”

Section: Clarity and Discontinuitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The clarity of referendums: An instrument for managing the (dis)continuity and perception of change

Miloš¹

2022

Pravni zapisi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Seen as a precondition for a referendum, clarity requires a clear referendum question and a clear majority for or against an outcome. In this article I argue clarity is not only an enabler of individual referendums but one way to politicize their context. In separating what is clear from what is obscure, clarity imposes the twin requirements of homogeneity and predictability. These, in turn, presuppose an interpretation of acceptable political (dis)continuities beyond the referendum as well as of perception of change. This reading of clarity shows how the referendum does not only manage change to which it is explicitly addressed, but that the purported voice of "the people" may at the same time be an instrument of clarity that imagines and normatively orders the referendum's surroundings.

show abstract

Section:  Clarity: a Precondition Internal To Referendumsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Clarity and Discontinuitymentioning

confidence: 99%

The clarity of referendums: An instrument for managing the (dis)continuity and perception of change

Miloš¹

2022

Pravni zapisi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Así, "si las negociaciones fracasan y se produce una declaración unilateral de independencia, ésta sería ilegal de acuerdo con el orden jurídico interno." 68 En efecto, en las democracias constitucionales la voluntad popular es ilegítima si se sitúa al margen de la ley, porque, como nos recuerda el Tribunal, "es la ley la que crea el marco dentro del cual se aplica la voluntad soberana." 69 El Tribunal formuló una doctrina constitucional para gestionar y afrontar tensiones políticas, incluso "para facilitar las relaciones humanas" 70 , que se convirtió en un punto de inflexión en el debate sobre constitucionalismo y secesión, 71 convirtiéndose en un ejemplo paradigmático de "migración constitucional."…”

Section: Estados Unidosunclassified

Secesión y constitucionalismo comparado

Campañá¹

2019

Derecho Político

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Este artículo examina el vínculo entre secesión y constitucionalismo en democracias constitucionales consolidadas analizando el debate entre el paradigma clásico, representado por el constitucionalismo americano, y el llamado nuevo paradigma, representado por el constitucionalismo canadiense. Mientras que la postura clásica se traduce en una interpretación muy restrictiva que prohíbe la secesión e incluso un referéndum de independencia, el nuevo paradigma intenta acomodar las demandas de secesión si hay una mayoría clara que así lo solicite. En la actualidad diversos ordenamientos jurídicos de democracias europeas se han visto forzados a responder a demandas secesionistas. Algún constitucionalismo, como el británico en el caso escocés, ha seguido el modelo del nuevo paradigma, permitiendo un referéndum de independencia en una parte del territorio nacional, aunque bajo supervisión del gobierno central y excluyendo la posibilidad de un derecho a la secesión (y un derecho a organizar referéndums de independencia) unilateral. En otros países, sin embargo, la posición del gobierno central y de los Altos Tribunales ha sido muy restrictiva. En este sentido, España es sin duda un ejemplo paradigmático, pero en ningún caso excepcional. Sentencias de la Corte Constitucional italiana y del Tribunal Constitucional alemán confirman, aunque con matices, esta posición española. En todos estos casos se ha señalado que, dado que la soberanía reside en el conjunto de ciudadanos, una parte de dicha ciudadanía no puede adoptar decisiones fundamentales que afectan a la totalidad del cuerpo electoral. Estas interpretaciones comunes muestran que el nuevo paradigma no ha venido a sustituir al clásico, sino que en la actualidad ambos conviven en democracias igualmente avanzadas. Además, el artículo también pretende resaltar que a pesar de las diferencias entre un modo de tratar la secesión y otro (paradigma clásico y nuevo), hay determinados rasgos comunes: respeto al Estado de Derecho y papel relevante de las instituciones estatales en el proceso, lo cual excluye cualquier tipo de secesión unilateral.

show abstract

Secession and European Union Law

González Campañá

2024

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Secession is a live issue in today’s Western Europe. In the last decade, we have witnessed the consolidation of pro-independence movements in Scotland and Catalonia, and in the near future, we might see their re-emergence or the rise of other pro-secession movements in other European regions. The response of the EU institutions to secession within EU Member States may well be based mainly on political considerations. However, since the EU is a community based on the rule of law, it has also to justify its position with normative arguments of principle. Secession and European Union Law provides such normative support, drawing on a pluralist reading of the relation between EU law and national law, to support the conclusion that EU law should respect domestic constitutional orders. This book studies secession within EU Member States through legal methodology: the theoretical-doctrinal analysis of concepts and institutions, considering the evolving reality and case law. The legal approach has three dimensions, given the three different legal orders that interact at the EU level: international law, EU law, and national constitutional law. Based on article 4(2) TEU, the central claim of this book is that the EU duty to respect national identity and fundamental constitutional structures generate obligations to respect Member States’ constitutional orders, provided that the values enshrined in the article are not violated by the Member State affected.

show abstract

The Law and Politics of Secession: From the Political Contingency of Secession to a “Right to Decide”? Can Lessons Be Learned from the Quebec Case?

Cited by 18 publications

References 10 publications

The clarity of referendums: An instrument for managing the (dis)continuity and perception of change

The clarity of referendums: An instrument for managing the (dis)continuity and perception of change

Secesión y constitucionalismo comparado

Secession and European Union Law

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About