Les Procedures de modification constitutionnelle dans les federations [Procedures for constitutional amendment in federations]

Massicotte, Louis and Yoshinaka, Antoine (2000) Les Procedures de modification constitutionnelle dans les federations [Procedures for constitutional amendment in federations]. Review of Constitutional Studies, 5 2: 138-172.


Author Massicotte, Louis
Yoshinaka, Antoine
Title Les Procedures de modification constitutionnelle dans les federations [Procedures for constitutional amendment in federations]
Formatted title
Les Procédures de modification constitutionnelle dans les fédérations
Journal name Review of Constitutional Studies
ISSN 1192-8034
Publication date 2000
Sub-type Article (original research)
Volume 5
Issue 2
Start page 138
End page 172
Total pages 35
Place of publication Edmonton, AB, Canada
Publisher Alberta Law Review and Centre for Constitutional Studies
Collection year 2000
Language eng
fre
Subject C3
360102 Comparative Government and Politics
780106 Political science and public policy
Formatted abstract
By world standards, the search for an amending formula in Canada, and the debates thereon, have been exceptionally long-lasting and intense. Minimal consideration has been given to the amending procedures in force in other federations. Following a review of the literature, seven normative assumptions as to what a federal amending procedure should include have been identified. This paper checks whether federations actually comply with these assumptions.

Constitutional amendment procedures are found to differ widely among federations. The principle that central governments should not be excluded from the process is the only one that is almost universally respected. The idea that States should be involved in one way or another is challenged by almost one-third of federations. While all central governments are endowed with the right to initiate amendments, States are in only half of federations. Referendums are found to be compulsory in less than one-quarter of federations. Three frequently advocated techniques for protecting particular States – unanimity, personal vetoes and opting-out – are very rarely found as part of the standard procedure, even in heterogeneous federations. Free and democratic federations do not differ markedly from more authoritarian ones, except by the greater incidence of referendums.
Q-Index Code C3

Document type: Journal Article
Sub-type: Article (original research)
Collection: School of Political Science and International Studies Publications
 
Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Created: Tue, 10 Jun 2008, 13:00:00 EST