In many countries beyond the traditional comparative constitutional law canon, the advocates of constitutionalism are increasingly appealing to a supra-national constitutional discourse frequently grounded in best practices for constitutionalism. This trend has helped to foster a nationalistic backlash which arguesin which constitutional advocates argue that constitutions should not reflect international constitutional norms but instead must reflect historically-grounded tradition or identity. How should advocates of constitutionalism understand and respond to this backlash? We argue that linking a critical interpretation of national history and the text of the national constitution to constitutionalism can help to counter this nationalist backlash, particularly in constitutional adjudication. Looking at Russia and Sri Lanka, we illustrate how this process of “redeeming the national” can provide new arguments for those interested in advancing the project of constitutionalism. We argue further that this kind of constitutional argument can also help to uncover ways of adapting constitutional principles to particular national contexts.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
