Sources and Examples Used in Writing Constitutions
The examples used throughout the Writing Constitutions are not meant to systematically cover all constitutions of the world. This would not only counteract the conciseness of this work but would also fail to fulfil its aim.
The aim is not to provide an overview of all constitutions, but an overview of constitutional instruments and solutions. As outlined before, the constitutional history of the world encompassed some trend-setting constitutions, partly leaned upon because of their novel approach, partly spread because of colonialism. These constitutions are often discussed, then those of long-established democracies, but also those of new democracies in particular in Eastern Europe, as well as the South African constitution. Being relatively modern constitutions, they attempt to overcome difficulties that more established constitutions have already considered. Given that the authors of the first volume are a German and German-Australian, particular emphasis has been made to include many examples of Asian and African, MiddleEastern and Latin American countries. Luckily, the authors could dwell on enormous research conducted on comparative constitutional law by the Constitute Project and authors such as Jackson/Tushnet (Comparative Constitutional Law, 1999), Rosenfeld/Sajo (Oxford Handbook of Comparative Constitutional Law, 2012), Ginsburg/Dixon (Comparative Constitutional Law, 2011), Ginsburg (Comparative Constitutional Design, 2012), Tushnet/Fleiner/Saunders (Routledge Handbook of Constitutional Law, 2015), Ginsburg/Simpser (Constitutions in Authoritarian Regimes, 2014), Fish/Kroenig (Handbook of National Legislatures, 2009), Fruhstorfer/Hein (Constitutional Politics in Central and Eastern Europe, 2016), research in Asian constitutional law (Wen-Chen Chang et al, Constitutionalism in Asia, 2014; Dixon/Ginsburg, Comparative Constitutional Law in Asia, 2014) and Latin American constitutional law (Negretto, Making Constitutions: Presidents, Parties, and Institutional Choice in Latin America, 2014); Dixon/Ginsburg (Comparative Constitutional Law in Latin America, 2017); to hopefully avoid Eurocentrism.However, the work of one particular European organisation has been considered and reflected throughout Writing Constitutions: The Venice Commission of the Council of Europe (The European Commission for Democracy through Law).
The Venice Commission not only advises the countries of Eastern Europe, but also many Asian countries which have emerged from the former Soviet Union as well as some countries in North Africa and Latin American. The deliberations of the Venice Commission that both authors had the privilege of working with is utterly impressive as it systematically comments on constitutional drafts and revisions of many of its member countries and compiles topical comparisons by its distinguished members.Where it was advisable, the authors have also identified similarities and differences between common and civil law approaches and constitutional design. For example, in topics such as parliamentary supremacy, immunity, impeachment, vote of no confidence, decentralised review of norms, independence of the public prosecution system or the review of a state of emergency.