Abstract

Bills of rights in contemporary constitutional democracies lend themselves to a pluralistic, rather than monistic or "irenistic", conception. Constitutional rights, principles, and values often conflict; they are plural, indeterminate, incommensurable. Thus, in constitutional democracies "powers of determination" (i.e., institutions whose task is to balance constitutional rights and values in their application to specific kinds of cases) are needed. Are powers of determination (e.g. judicial review of legislation, or constitutional amending by democratic assemblies) compatible with the ambitions of contemporary constitutionalism?