The presentation examines how the Irish and the German Constitution can be actively changed towards more sustainability. Neither the Irish nor the German Constitution contains written environmental rights. At the same time, they address participatory constitutional change through diametrically opposed legal designs. Ireland focuses on constitutional referendums. Germany lacks this option and relies on constitutional litigation instead. These diametrically opposed approaches partly revive the ‘old’ debate between the ‘tyranny of the majority’ (referendums) and the ‘tyranny of juristocracy’ (constitutional litigation) on the ‘new’ playing field of climate change. Using the ‘basic methodological principle’ of comparative law, i.e., the functional method, the presentation compares the different approaches to democratic participation in environmental constitutional change in Ireland and Germany. Since both approaches have been criticised as either ‘Russian roulette for republics’ (Irish referendums) or as ‘eco-dictatorship’ (German constitutional litigation), the presentation discusses the legitimacy of both approaches and analyses their effectiveness in addressing climate change.
Weiterleiten
