Abstract
The issue of recognition of diversity in multinational states means that, in certain exceptional circumstances, political debates are transported into the judicial arena. The courts are thus required to define and circumscribe the political developments that are most able to maintain political stability while containing, to a certain extent, pressures from minority nations. In doing so, not only do they contribute to refocusing the debate on the conditions of acceptability of the claims of these minorities, but they also present, in a generally coherent way, the manner in which the majority group perceives itself. The recent Spanish Constitutional Court decision of June 2010, regarding the constitutionality of the Catalan Statute of Autonomy of 2006, has generated a serious crisis in the constitutional accommodation of Catalunya within Spain. The impact of this decision and the debates that have followed echo the significance of and discussion surrounding the Canadian Supreme Court’s decision on the Quebec secession reference in 1998, highlighting again the fundamental role of the Supreme/Constitutional Courts in the accommodation of national minorities in multinational polities.
Keywords
- Political Community
- Autonomous Community
- National Minority
- Constitutional Amendment
- Constitutional Framework
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Alberti, Enoch. (2010). Concepto y fun ci on del Estatuto de Autonomîa en la Sentencia 31/2010, de28 de junio, sobre el Estatuto de Autonomîa de Cataluna, Special issue of the Revista catalana de dretpublic, pp. 81–85.
Baicelo, Merce, Bernadî, Xavier and Vintro, Joan, (coords) (2010). Especial Sentencia 31/2010 del Tribunal Constitucional, sobre el Estatuto de Autonomîa de Cataluna de 2006, Special issue of the Revista catalana de drei public.
BOUT dieu, Pierre. (1977). “Sur le pouvoir symbolique,” Annales. Économies, Sociétés, Civilisations, 32: 3, mai-juin, pp. 405–411.
Bourdieu, Piene. (1986). “La force du droit,” Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales, 64, septembre, pp. 3–19.
Bourdieu, Piene. (2012). Sur l’État Cours au Colláge de France 1989–1992 (Paris: Seuil).
Brouillet, Eugénie and Yves Tanguay. (2011). “La légitimité de l’arbitrage constitutionnel en régime fédératif multinational. Le cas de la Cour suprême du Canada,” in Michel Seymour and Guy Laforest (eds), Le fédéralisme multinational. Un modále viable? (Bruxelles: P.I.E. Peter Lang), pp. 133–153.
Canada, Clarity Act S.C. 2000 c. 26.
Diaz, Francisco. (2011) “La tipologîa de los pronunciamientos en la STC 31/2010 y sus efectos sobre el Estatuto catalan y otras normas del ordenamiento vigente,” Revista catalana de dret public Vol. 43, pp. 53–86.
Fossas, Enric. (2010). El Estatuto como norma y su funcion constitucional. Comentario a la Sentencia31/2010, Special issue of the Revista catalana de dret public pp. 91–95.
Fossas, Enric. (2011). “El control de constitucionalitat dels Estatuts d’Autonomia,” Revista catalana de dret public Vol. 43, pp. 21–51.
Gibson, James L., Gregory A. Caldeira and Vanessa A. Baird. (1998). “On the Legitimacy of National High Courts,” American Political Science Review Vol. 92, pp. 343–358.
Institut D’Estudis Autonomies. (2011). Special issue “Especial sobre la Sentáncia de l’Estatut d’autonomia de Catalunya,” Revista d’Estudis Federals i Autonomies p. 12
Knopff, Rainer, Dennis Baker and Sylvia LeRoy. (2009). “Courting Controversy: Strategic Judicial Decision Making,” in James Kelly and Christopher Manfredi (eds), Contested Constitutionalism (Vancouver: UBC Press), pp. 66–85.
Lajoie, Andrée. (1997). Jugements de valeurs. Le discours judiciaire et le droit (Paris: Presses universitaires de France).
Lajoie, Andrée. (2000). “La primauté du droit et la légitimité démocratique comme enjeux du Renvoi sur la sécession du Québec”, Politique et Sociétés Vol. 19, pp. 31–41.
Leclair, Jean. (2000). “The Secession Reference: A Ruling in Search of a Nation”, Revue juridique Thémis Vol. 34, pp. 885–890.
Mandel, Michael. (1999). “A Solomonic Judgment?”, Canada Watch Vol. 7, pp. 1–2.
McFalls, Laurence. (2005). “L’Etat bâtard: illégitimité et légitimation chez Max Weber,” in Michel Coutu and Guy Rocher (eds), La légitimité de l’État et du droit Autour de Max Weber (Québec: Presses de l’Université Laval), pp. 47–60.
Millard, Gregory. (1999). “The Secession Reference and National Reconciliation: A Critical Note”, Canadian journal of Law and Society Vol. 14, No. 2, pp. 1–19.
Ocqueteau, Frédéric and Francine Soubiran-Paillet. (1996). “Champ juridique, juristes et rágles de droit: une sociologie entre disqualification et paradoxe”, Droit et société Vol. 32, pp. 9–26.
Perelman, Chai’m. (1978). “La motivation des décisions de justice, essai de syntháse” in Chaïm Perelman & Paul Foriers (eds) La motivation des décisions de justice (Bruxelles: Emile Bruylant), pp. 415–426.
Pinard, Maurice. (2000). Confusion and Misunderstanding Surrounding the Sovereignist Option (Brief submitted to the legislative committee of the House of Commons studying Bill C-20, 24 February).
Radmilovic, Vuk. (2010). “Strategic Legitimacy Cultivation at the Supreme Court of Canada: Quebec Secession Reference and Beyond”, Canadian Journal of Political Science Vol. 43, No. 4, December, pp. 843–869.
Rocher, François and Nadia Verrelli. (2003). “Questioning Constitutional Democracy in Canada: From the Canadian Supreme Court Reference on Quebec Secession to the Clarity Act”, in A.-G. Gagnon, Montserat Guibernau and F. Rocher (eds), The Institutional Accommodation of Diversity (Montreal: Institute for Research on Public Policy), pp. 207–237.
Supreme Court of Canada. (1998). Reference re Secession of Quebec, [1998] 2 S.C.R. 217.
Thornhill, Chris. (2010). “Legality, Legitimacy and the Constitution: A Historical-Functionalist Approach”, in Chris Thomhill & Samantha Ashenden (eds), Legality and Legitimacy: Normative and Sociological Approaches (Baden-Baden: Nomos), pp. 29–56.
Tierney Stephen. (2003). “The Constitutional Accommodation of National Minorities in the UK and Canada: Judicial Approaches to Diversity”, in A.-G. Gagnon, Montserat Guibernau and F. Rocher (eds), The Institutional Accommodation of Diversity (Montreal: Institute for Research on Public Policy), pp. 169–206.
Tur, Rosario and Alvarez, Enrique. (2010). La consecuencias juridicas de la Sentencia 31/2010, de 28 dejunio, del Tribunal Constitucional sobre el Estatuto de Cataluna. La Sentencia de la perfecta Libertad (Cizur m enor: Aranzadi/Thomson Reuters).
Viver, Carles. (2011). “El Tribunal Constitucional: Sempre, nomes.... i indis-cutible”? La funcio constitutional dels estauts en l’ambit de la distribucio de competencies scons la STC 31/20101, Revista d’Estudis Federals i Autonomics 12, pp. 363–402.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2014 Elisenda Casanas Adam and François Rocher
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Adam, E.C., Rocher, F. (2014). (Mis)recognition in Catalunya and Quebec: The Politics of Judicial Containment. In: Lluch, J. (eds) Constitutionalism and the Politics of Accommodation in Multinational Democracies. St Antony’s Series. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137288998_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137288998_3
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-45003-9
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-28899-8
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political Science CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)