The Foundations of Constitutional Democracy: The Kelsen-Natural Law Controversy

Nathan Gibbs*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)
56 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

In the immediate post-war period, a set of thinkers, most notably Jacques Maritain, developed influential natural law theories of constitutional democracy. The central tenet of the natural law approach to the post-war settlement was that, without the type of foundational understanding of the constitutional system it was proposing, the new democratic political institutions would relapse into totalitarianism. In response to this natural law challenge, Hans Kelsen sought to explicate and defend a self-consciously secular and relativistic understanding of the basis of constitutional democracy. This article will examine the debate between the Kelsenian and the natural law view of constitutional democracy. The debate raises questions of foundational importance, and a number of issues are of particular concern in the present global context. These issues concern the role of moral pluralism and its relevance to the structure of constitutional democracy, and the relationship between universal values and the common good of particular communities.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)79-107
Number of pages29
JournalCanadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence
Volume37
Issue number1
Early online date27 Feb 2024
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 27 Feb 2024

Keywords

  • constitutional theory
  • Kelsen
  • natural law

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'The Foundations of Constitutional Democracy: The Kelsen-Natural Law Controversy'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this