On Paradoxes in Constitutions

In the opening chapter, Giancarlo Corsi offers an overview of the main reasons why the constitution is a paradoxical concept. A sophisticated approach like that of the general systems theory in particular of its self-referential variant is capable not only of revealing the constitution’s paradoxes, but also of suggesting corresponding solutions. Constitution is a self-constituting set of norms which furnishes a sense to the legal system as a whole. This can be achieved by distinguishing between two different parts of the constitution: a general part containing the basic values indicated by the constitution’s fundamental point of reference, and an instrumental part that identifies certain basic procedures for translating those values into reality. This dichotomy is also related to the ambiguous role of the fundamental rights that cannot be generalised in a normal constitution because they are connected to case-by-case definitions handed down by the administration of justice. One example of circular self-reference that underpins paradoxes is the transfer from political to legal systems and vice-versa: this is supported by constitutions, and open to constant revisions and self-critical adjustments whose purpose is to communicate acceptable criteria of rationality to other systems and concretely to define the constitutionality-unconstitutionality dichotomy.