02203     2200217   4500001002100000005001500021035002000036007000300056008004100059020001800100082001200118084001800130100002200148245013000170260003500300300002600335650002300361520154900384990002601933990002601959INLIS00000000001041020220124110237  a0010-0122000144ta220124                g          0 eng    a9783319283692  a342.001  a342.001 THO d0 aThomas Bustamante1 aDemocratizing constitutional law :bperspectives on legal theory and the legitimacy of constitutionalism /cThomas Bustamante  aSwitzerland :bSpringer,c2016  axi, 328 hlm. ;c23 cm 4aConstitutional law  aThis volume critically discusses the relationship between democracy and constitutionalism. It does so with a view to respond to objections raised by legal and political philosophers who are sceptical of judicial review based on the assumption that judicial review is an undemocratic institution. The book builds on earlier literature on the moral justification of the authority of constitutional courts, and on the current attempts to develop a system on “weak judicial review”. Although different in
their approach, the chapters all focus on devising institutions, procedures and, in a more abstract way, normative conceptions to democratize constitutional law. These democratizing strategies may vary from a radical objection to the institution of judicial review, to a more modest proposal to
justify the authority of constitutional courts in their “deliberative performance” or to create constitutional juries that may be more aware of a community’s constitutional morality than constitutional courts are.  The book connects abstract theoretical discussions about the moral justification of constitutionalism with concrete problems, such as the relation between constitutional adjudication and deliberative democracy, the legitimacy of judicial review in international institutions, the need to create new institutions to democratize
constitutionalism, the connections between philosophical conceptions and constitutional practices, the judicial review of constitutional amendments, and the criticism on strong judicial review.  a26724/MKRI-P/XII-2021  a26724/MKRI-P/XII-2021