Justice and equality for all? Proportional representation in Belgium and France (1883-1921)

Whereas 19th century Belgium is traditionally framed as heavily dependent on France, this image ought to be nuanced for its political system. During what Pierre Rosanvallon named the transnational ‘proportional moment’ (1899-1914), the introduction of Proportional Representation in parliamentary elections generated a French interest in Belgium as the ‘electoral laboratory of Europe’. Arguments raised in the French Chambre des Députés were similar to those used in Belgian Parliament. The present article addresses the structural differences between the electoral debate in both states. Whereas Be... Mehr ...

Verfasser: Frederik Dhondt
Dokumenttyp: Artikel
Erscheinungsdatum: 2021
Reihe/Periodikum: Sequência: Estudos Juridicos e Politicos, Vol 41, Iss 86 (2021)
Verlag/Hrsg.: Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina
Schlagwörter: Constitutional law / Belgian legal history / French legal history / Electoral law / Public law / Law / K / Law in general. Comparative and uniform law. Jurisprudence / K1-7720
Sprache: Deutsch
Englisch
Spanish
Portuguese
Permalink: https://search.fid-benelux.de/Record/base-26521894
Datenquelle: BASE; Originalkatalog
Powered By: BASE
Link(s) : https://doi.org/10.5007/2177-7055.2020v41n86p28

Whereas 19th century Belgium is traditionally framed as heavily dependent on France, this image ought to be nuanced for its political system. During what Pierre Rosanvallon named the transnational ‘proportional moment’ (1899-1914), the introduction of Proportional Representation in parliamentary elections generated a French interest in Belgium as the ‘electoral laboratory of Europe’. Arguments raised in the French Chambre des Députés were similar to those used in Belgian Parliament. The present article addresses the structural differences between the electoral debate in both states. Whereas Belgian constitutional doctrine adapted smoothly to the introduction of proportionality (Oscar Orban/Paul Errera) and held a moderate position bordering on that of Hans Kelsen, French doctrine was divided between the Parisian Adhémar Esmein, who defended the majority system as the bedrock of republicanism, and provincial professors of constitutional law, who had corporatist ideas, or were in favour of judicial review (Joseph-Barthélémy, Léon Duguit). Raymond Carré de Malberg’s condemnation of proportional representation as impossible, or as the stepping-stone to direct democracy, ought to be situated within this context.