From Deliberative Democracy to Dialogic Constitutionalism

Deliberative democracy has contributed to the emergence of a constitutionalism at the service of inclusive dialogue, the so-called dialogic constitutionalism. Notwithstanding the expansion, potential and reciprocal contributions between the two trends, the link between them has not been without problems. Firstly, the connection has often been inconsistent, because while a deliberative conception has been defended at the democratic level, a strong conception has been defended at the constitutional level. Secondly, the connection has generally been restricted, as the deliberative agenda has been limited to exceptional moments or specific issues. Thirdly, the connection has been largely theoretical, as the two trends have not addressed the institutional implications in detail. Fourthly, the connection has mostly been abstract and general, as the intersection of the two trends has not been contextual. In this framework, Cristina Lafont’s Democracy without shortcuts: a participatory conception of deliberative democracy has recently been published. Given that this book is part of the path of deliberative democracy, the aim of this paper is to analyse its limits and contributions to dialogic constitutionalism, as well as its continuities and ruptures with respect to the path reached by deliberative democracy in the constitutional field.