Future Scholarship and the Ongoing Debate

In addition to expanding our understanding of founding moments in consti­tutionalism, the chapters in this book have also touched upon other topics that require deeper investigation and could potentially help push the boundaries of scholarship in this flourishing subfield.

First, there needs to be a detailed study of constitutions devoid of founding moments. Although the reductionist view has been that founding moments lead to constitution-building, this volume has demonstrated that this is not always the case. The question of why and how a constitution may come into fruition with­out a founding moment and how a society may form a cohesive constitutional narrative without a founding moment will be another intriguing area of research. Second, there is also a paucity of research on founding moments that are devoid of grand narratives. Jhaveri's chapter on Singapore and Hong Kong has shed some light on the phenomenon that may be called ‘pragmatic constitutionalism', where a constitutional order comes into existence not because of revolutions or war, but rather because of immediate practical need. How does a society create an underly­ing ‘nomos' when the guiding document itself was built more on administrative necessity as opposed to a ‘higher' political and social purpose? And are citizens in such societies also driven less by a sense of cohesive national purpose and more by pragmatism?

Another potential subcategory for founding moments in constitutionalism could be on the question of constitutions written by foreign powers and minor­ity groups. In the first case, future scholars can address the relationship between national narrative and the constitution when - as in the case of post-war Japan and Germany - the founding document was written not by the citizens, but by foreign powers. In other words, can the citizenry still derive a national ‘nomos' from a document that was not written by them, but rather for them? And are there found­ing moments - such as defeat in war - that are not conducive to narrative-building constitutionalism? In the case of constitutions written by the ruling minority, questions around how the founding moment is interpreted by the majority and whether the majority can grant any legitimacy to such a document would be a fascinating area of exploration.

When the Founding Moments in Constitutionalism symposium was organised in 2016, it was the intention of the organisers that research in this area not be confined to the chapters in this volume. While the chapters in this collection have expanded our knowledge and understanding of founding moments in consti­tutionalism, this book is also an open invitation to continue the debate on this captivating topic. It is the desire of the editors of this volume that scholars will accept this invitation and that this burgeoning field of legal study will be further expanded.