differentiate between constitutionalism as a descriptive and prescriptive concept
Differentiate between Constitutionalism as a Descriptive and Prescriptive Concept
Constitutionalism: Overview
Constitutionalism is a complex term used in political theory, law, and governance to describe the principles and practices anchoring the operational frameworks of governmental entities into a predefined, mutually agreed, and often legally upheld constitution. In essence, it places the constitution as both the source of authority and limitation of power, ensuring governance adheres to established rules and principles. However, constitutionalism can be understood and analyzed from two principal angles — descriptive and prescriptive — each providing differing insights and implications for interpretation and application.
1. Descriptive Constitutionalism
Definition
Descriptive constitutionalism refers to the analysis and articulation of how constitutional systems actually function in practice, without necessarily making value judgments. It involves describing the existing state of constitutional principles, structures, and processes within a particular nation or system.
Characteristics
-
Empirical Observation: Descriptive constitutionalism relies heavily on empirical analysis, documenting how governmental systems operate, who holds power, and how it’s exercised. It looks into constitutional documents, court rulings, historical applications, and governmental practices to understand the actual workings of a constitution.
-
Neutral Perspective: This approach attempts to maintain an objective stance, avoiding prescriptive judgments or opinions about whether the constitutional practices being described are “good” or “bad.” The emphasis is solely on observation and reporting.
-
Focus on Existing Structures: It is concerned more with how constitutional systems are applied in real-life scenarios than how they should be. This encompasses an examination of political entities, the roles of public offices, the interaction between different branches of government, and the functioning of checks and balances.
Examples
Consider a researcher studying the United States Constitution’s application. From a descriptive perspective, this might involve:
- Observing how the separation of powers is practically handled between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches.
- Describing the processes of Constitutional amendments or Supreme Court interpretations.
- Analyzing specific historical cases where constitutional powers were contested.
By documenting these observations, the researcher paints a picture of how constitutionalism functions within a specific political context.
Utility
Descriptive constitutionalism is critical for:
- Historical Analysis: Understanding the evolution and historical context of constitutional practices.
- Comparative Studies: Comparing different constitutional systems objectively to identify variances and similarities.
- Political Science Research: Offering a factual basis for political scientists examining governance patterns across regions or time periods.
2. Prescriptive Constitutionalism
Definition
Prescriptive constitutionalism, on the other hand, refers to the normative aspect of constitutional analysis, focusing on how constitutional systems should function based on certain ethical, moral, or legal standards. It advocates for reforms or improvements to meet ideal constitutional ideals.
Characteristics
-
Value-Based Judgments: This perspective introduces judgments about what constitutes a “good” constitutional system. It considers the underlying principles that should guide a nation’s constitution, such as democracy, human rights, justice, and separation of powers.
-
Normative Orientation: Prescriptive constitutionalism provides recommendations and prescriptions for how a constitution should be structured, interpreted, and implemented to achieve ideal governance.
-
Ideal Standards: It often focuses on aligning actual constitutional practices with ideal goals or theoretical standards of justice, fairness, and effectiveness. It is inherently normative, aiming to guide political entities towards improved governance structures.
Examples
Using the same example of the United States Constitution, a prescriptive constitutional analysis might include:
- Evaluating the effectiveness of checks and balances in preventing governmental overreach and advocating for changes if needed.
- Arguing for reforms in constitutional interpretation methods, like moving from strict originalism to a more dynamic approach that considers contemporary societal needs.
- Proposing new amendments to address emerging rights and freedoms, resonating with modern democratic values.
Utility
Prescriptive constitutionalism plays a crucial role in:
- Legal and Political Reforms: Informing legislators and policymakers about necessary changes or amendments for more just and effective governance.
- Advocacy and Activism: Supporting legal advocacy and activism aiming at constitutional change to promote human rights, democracy, or other normative goals.
- Legal Scholarship: Contributing to theoretical debates on constitutionalism, informing academic discussions about the future directions of constitutional development.
Comparative Analysis
Descriptive vs. Prescriptive: Key Differences
-
Objective vs. Normative: Whereas descriptive constitutionalism focuses on objective reporting of constitutional realities, prescriptive constitutionalism involves normative evaluations and recommendations.
-
Observation vs. Advocacy: Descriptive efforts are centered on observation, while prescriptive ones are advocacy for aligning the governance systems with ideal constitutional principles.
-
Empirical vs. Values-based: Descriptive approaches rely on empirical data and historical facts, while prescriptive approaches are informed by ethical or theoretical values.
Interrelation of the Two Concepts
Although distinct, descriptive and prescriptive constitutionalism are deeply interconnected. Understanding how a constitutional system functions in practice (descriptive) often informs the need for reforms, adjustments, or enhancements (prescriptive). Similarly, ideals and recommendations from prescriptive constitutionalism can inspire empirical studies to observe their realization or necessity.
Application in Governance and Law
Governments, policymakers, and legal scholars often employ both descriptive and prescriptive constitutionalism to hold governance systems accountable and ensure they remain relevant and aligned with societal values. Efforts to interpret and apply constitutional law, guide policymaking, or advocate for constitutional amendments use these dual perspectives to balance between “what is” and “what ought to be.” Both perspectives, critical in their own right, together provide a comprehensive understanding of constitutionalism, aiding informed decision-making and promoting democratic governance globally.
In conclusion, while descriptive constitutionalism centers on understanding existing structures and practices, prescriptive constitutionalism focuses on advocating for desired states of constitutional governance. Together, they offer a holistic framework for analyzing, understanding, and improving constitutional systems, ensuring they effectively serve their intended purpose within society’s evolving landscape.