ÀÖÓãºǫ́

Constitutions bind societies to prescribed ways of taking and enacting collective decisions. Moreover, they limit the kind and range of decisions that can be made – excluding, first and foremost, basic individual and collective rights from any legislative change. Constitutions are protected by high (‘supreme’) courts, defending them against elected governments and elected lawmakers. They can be amended and adapted to changing circumstances, but usually only through difficult and lengthy procedures, particularly so in the US.

Against this general background, we will discuss three core questions:

First, is it true that constitutions and the institutions and procedures protecting them against change are anti-democratic, as they limit the range of democratic decision-making while entrenching, directly or indirectly, traditional values, policies and elites? Do we need to re-think these limits or ought we – on the contrary – further shore up constitutional bulwarks against majoritarian policies, populist parties and populist leaders, as the current situation in the US might suggest?

Second, ought constitutions be remade so as to protect future generations – in fact, our own children – against climate change and ecocide, maybe also against other imminent threats such as AI-station of politics and of other fields of human (inter)action?

Finally, can and should we systematically enlarge and deepen democratic participation by constitutionally entrenching new forms of decision-making – such as by citizens’ assemblies that represent all sections of society – while maybe also coopting the possibilities that the Internet opens in this direction? These three questions are obviously interrelated – yet not in obvious ways.

To discuss these tricky issues we have invited four major authorities in the field:

The Speakers

Henk Kummeling is Professor of Comparative Constitutional Law at Utrecht University. Apart from constitutional law, he also focusses on the connection between university and society. He was Rector Magnificus of Utrecht University from 2018 to 2025. He was also President of the Dutch Electoral Council from 2005 to 2017 and he recently chaired the State Committee on Rule of Law established by the last Dutch government.

Christoph Moellers is Professor of Public Law and Jurisprudence at the Faculty of Law, Humboldt-University Berlin. He was a Fellow at NYU School of Law and is a permanent Fellow at the Wissenschaftskolleg zu Berlin. He is a member of the Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Sciences and was a judge at the Superior Administrative Court in Berlin. His main interests include German, European and comparative constitu­tional law, regulated industries, democratic theory in public law, and the theory of normativity.

Jerfi Uzman is Professor of Constitutional Law at the University of Amsterdam. He teaches both Domestic and Comparative Constitutional Law, and Human Rights Law. He is the current editor-in-chief of the Netherlands Journal of Human Rights Law (NTM). His research focuses on the separation of powers, specifically in the relationship between courts and political institutions, effective legal protection of fundamental rights, informal constitutional norms, and the impact of populism on constitutional doctrine.

Eva van Vugt is Assistant Professor of constitutional law at the Public Law Department of  Maastricht University. Her current research focuses on the parliamentary system and the written and unwritten rules that govern the composition and interplay between parliament and government as well as on "the law of democracy", i.e. the rules and institutions within which the political process of collective decision-making takes place.

The debate is hosted by ‘Global Futures of Democracy’, an initiative of Institutions for Open Societies and coordinated by Lars Behrisch (Political History).

Everyone interested in the present and future of democracy is welcome to join. We will finish the debate with a reception. Due to a limited number of places, please early.

This event will be held in English.