This article develops a theory of ‘a-legal space’ and its utilization as a political–legal strategy. A-legal space refers to initiatives which adopt a quasi-legal or quasi-institutional form, yet with no official legal basis; a disputed legal basis; or exceeding their recognized legal basis. Examples include unauthorized referenda such as the Catalan independence referendum which took place in 2017 and, on a local level, across Catalonia in 2009–2011; peoples’ tribunals such as the World Tribunal on Iraq, where the US and UK governments were tried for war crimes; and the Aboriginal Tent Embassy where aboriginal activists protesting for land rights erected tents outside the Australian Parliament and declared it an embassy. The use of a-legal space is an under-studied and untheorized tactic employed with increasing regularity by social movement, civil society, and sometimes, state and substate actors. The article builds on the work of political theorist Marta Harnecker, who coined the term ‘a-legal space’, through situating it within the existing philosophical conception of a-legality developed by critical legal scholar Hans Lindahl (2013). The aim is to contribute to an understanding of why citizens undertake these initiatives and how they can have a political impact.

No abstract

The processes of constitutional change and resultant constitutional models initiated in Venezuela, Bolivia, and Ecuador since the late 1990s have been celebrated for offering a democratic form of constitutionalism. The new Latin American constitutionalism promises to resolve the democratic deficit in traditional constitutional theory by institutionalizing spaces for citizen-led constitutional change. However, events in which actors outside the state or without the wider support of the state have attempted to initiate similar processes of constitutional transformation suggest a problem with current theories. This is a residual bias toward state actors and a tendency to underestimate the power of extrainstitutional actors in these processes. By reconceiving the central concepts of “constituent power” and “constitutional process,” an account of the new Latin American constitutionalism is possible that both resolves remaining tensions in the literature and illustrates the relevance of this phenomenon to struggles across the continent. Los procesos de cambio constitucional y los modelos constitucionales resultantes iniciados en Venezuela, Bolivia y Ecuador desde fines de la década de 1990 se han celebrado por ofrecer una forma democrática de constitucionalismo. El nuevo constitucionalismo latinoamericano promete resolver el déficit democrático en la teoría constitucional tradicional mediante la institucionalización de espacios para el cambio constitucional liderado por los ciudadanos. Sin embargo, eventos en los cuales actores fuera del estado o sin el apoyo más amplio del estado han intentado iniciar procesos similares de transformación constitucional sugieren un problema con las teorías actuales. Este es un sesgo residual hacia los actores estatales y una tendencia a subestimar el poder de los actores extrainstitucionales en estos procesos. Al reconcebir los conceptos centrales del “poder constituyente” y el “proceso constitucional,” es posible hacer un recuento del nuevo constitucionalismo latinoamericano que resuelve las tensiones restantes en la literatura y demuestra la relevancia de este fenómeno para luchas en todo el continente.

No abstract