Do postcommunist constitutions reflect a theory of society, which would contribute to the consolidation of new democracies around symbols and meanings, and to the formation of a positive constitutional consensus? Do they allow for choosing from many options of further development? The former system had such a theory at its disposal - it was Stalinist constitutionalism, founded on the Marxist theory of social development and a clearly defined distinction between Stalinist and liberal democratic constitutionalism. The social correlate of Stalinist constitutionalism, known also as hypocritical, presented a negative constitutional consensus. Current difficulties in the democratic consolidation, and the formation of a positive constitutional consensus are a result of a particular character of the legitimization of the transformation, in the concept of a legal revolution, and of the lacking of an undisputable and clear conceptualization of human rights. The latter present a deciding factor in the postcommunist differentiation from the Stalinist constitutionalism. In consequence, a hypothetic possibility of an eclectic constitutionalism emerges which success depends on its reflection of local democratic tradition and social aspirations
Financed by the National Centre for Research and Development under grant No. SP/I/1/77065/10 by the strategic scientific research and experimental development program:
SYNAT - “Interdisciplinary System for Interactive Scientific and Scientific-Technical Information”.