About PopCon

This is the official website of the "Populist Constitutionalism" research program, which is funded by the Greek Foundation for Research and Innovation (H.F.R.I. - ΕΛ.ΙΔ.Ε.Κ.) within the framework of the "1st Call for H.F.R.I. Research Projects to Support Faculty Members & Researchers and Procure High-Value Research Equipment» action plan (project no: HFRI-FM17-1502). Akritas Kaidatzis, Assistant Professor of Law, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, is the principal investigator, working together with a seven-member research team.

​

The main objective of the proposed work is to study the various ways in which populism(s) interact with constitutionalism, in order to propose an approach to constitutional law that mitigates populist challenges to constitutional democracy by enabling greater popular participation in constitutional decision-making. Somewhat paradoxically, the main idea is that constitutionalism needs to become more “populist”, in order to overcome challenges posed by populist politics.

 

In recent years there has been an expanding literature on a phenomenon identified as “populist constitutionalism”, which refers to the constitutional discourses and practices of populist movements, parties or leaders and their engagement, once in power, with constitution-making and constitutional reform. In that sense, populist constitutionalism poses a challenge to constitutional democracy.

 

However, this has not been the sole usage of the term in literature. U.S. constitutional scholars proposed in the 1990s a different conception of populist (or popular) constitutionalism, which refers to a non-legalistic approach to constitutional law, that rejects the idea that the constitution means (solely) what judicial elites say it means, and contends instead that the political branches of government, as well as political parties, social movements, and ultimately the people themselves have at least an equal say on constitutional meaning.

 

Thus, there exist two different conceptions of populist constitutionalism. A comparative study of their relationship would help illuminate both. Populist (or popular) constitutionalism as an approach to constitutional law aspires to be an attempt to synthesize liberalism with democracy by enhancing popular participation; as such it appears to contradict populism as a political practice. It could be said, thus, that populist constitutionalism in the second sense (as a practice of constitutional law) may reduce the perils of populist constitutionalism in the first sense (as a practice of populists).