Constitutional performance assessment: Ecuador, Bolivia and Venezuela in comparative perspective

A main function of a Constitution is to thrive Democratic system that underpins it. A broadly shared criterion for assessing constitutional performance is the degree of a Constitution has served to promote some relatively minimal concept of Democracy. This paper seeks to analyse how transformative constitutionalism has contributed to this by comparing three different constitutional settings: Ecuador, Bolivia and Venezuela. I disentangle the aforementioned constitutions to assess their performance in terms of measuring the change of a minimum core: a set of institutions, procedures, and individual rights that are necessary to maintain a system of multiparty competitive democracy. Particularly I present a Schumpeterian approach that encompasses basic commitments to regular and free elections in which parties compete for access to democratic office, and citizens have the ultimate right to decide by casting vote, free of intimidation and harassment, on the basis of adult suffrage.