Sovereignty, Civic Participation, and Constitutional Law by Brecht Deseure Raf Geenens Stefan Sottiaux

Author:Brecht Deseure, Raf Geenens, Stefan Sottiaux [Brecht Deseure, Raf Geenens, Stefan Sottiaux]
Language: eng
Format: epub
Tags: Nonfiction, Reference & Language, Law, Civil Rights, History, European General
ISBN: 9781000375039
Publisher: Taylor and Francis
Published: 2021-04-12T04:00:00+00:00

Publications without a specific, personal author (such as newspapers and official documents) are listed under S.A.

Notes

1 The National Congress counted 200 members. For an overview of the Belgian Revolution: Witte (2005).

2 On the constituent process: Gilissen (1967, pp. 38–69); Magits (1977); Van Den Steene (1963).

3 For the intellectual and ideological background of the Belgian Revolution: Viaene (2001); Marteel (2018).

4 On the article’s origin: Alen (1984, vol. 2, p. 89); Descamps-David (1891); Van Den Steene (1963).

5 The constituent debates have been published in Huyttens (1844a–d).

6 For an in-depth overview of the oppositional newspapers and the ties between their collaborators: Vermeersch (1981).

7 Men of letters, together with jurists, constituted around 65% of the revolutionary political actors (Witte, 1980, p. 109).

8   Cf. popular sovereignty in the French July Revolution: Barbé (1904); Rosanvallon (1994, p. 175).

9   On the republican movement in the Belgian Revolution: De Mulder (1970); Witte (2020).

10 A preamble to the constitution containing a legitimation of the Belgian Revolution was planned but never realised (Huyttens, 1844b, pp. 590–592, session of 24 February 1831). See also Magits (1977, pp. 398–399); Deseure (2016a, p. 32); Meulebrouck (2017, pp. 777–785).

11 The congressmen do not seem to have clearly distinguished between national ‘will’, ‘wish’, or ‘interest’. We argue that the term ‘national wish’ – which attributes a certain latitude in the representatives’ decisional autonomy, without entirely dissociating the link between their decisions and the will of their constituents – more accurately expresses the founding fathers’ view than the ‘national will’. On the origin of the distinction, see Grange (1974, pp. 267–272).

12 On the eve of the Belgian Revolution, the term ‘nation’ was central to political discourse in the newspapers. It was bound up with notions of a common language and freedom. It was often liberally connoted, referring to constitutional monarchy, popular sovereignty, and representative government (Witte, 2006).

13 Afterwards, the newspaper changed its stance and recognised the article as an incarnation of popular sovereignty: EMP (2 November 1830, no. 13).

14 On the characteristics of the Belgian nation as perceived by the congressmen: Gilissen (1952, pp. 82–90); De Dijn (2012).

15 On 1 January 1831, the Courrier des Pays-Bas changed its title to Le Courrier.

16 The newspaper even explicitly acknowledged the radicals’ viewpoints on this matter: CDM (25 November 1830, no. 284) with reference to L’Émancipation.

17 See on this relativism e.g. Todorov (1999, pp. 63–64).

18 See e.g. Nothomb’s argumentation against abstract theories revolving around the form of state (Huyttens, 1844a, pp. 192, 19 November 1830, Nothomb). See also Alen (1984, vol. 1, p. 207); Geenens and Sottiaux (2015, p. 308); Deseure (2016b, p. 147).

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.