Who are We the People ONLINE? With the development of digital technology in contemporary democracies, many new digital methods have been applied to public participation. However, although digital participation can theoretically break the geographic boundaries, the cybersecurity issues also affect national security. In Taiwan, as an example, in recent years, the policy emphasizes digital democracy. However, there have been many noteworthy cases in the face of different cybersecurity challenges such as fake news and fake accounts from home and abroad, affecting elections and public orders. These situations may affect the trust of the community and national security. Thus, this article attempts to propose a framework from the perspective of ‘membership and exclusion’ to explore the questions about whether governments can and should set boundaries of the community of digital public participation based on the concerns of national security, and why or why not.
Populism, as a political style, rests on the rhetorical and mediatic construction of political personae. Its aim is to grant politicians enough popular support to allow them to bypass, co-opt or pervert democratic institutions. Populist leaders make use of the principle of popular sovereignty to put forward a synecdochical, reduced version of democracy.
Courts play a key role in preventing this downgrading of democracy by affirming the primacy of rule of law over populist whim. In their effort to safeguard democratic values, however, Courts may risk being tempted to overextend their powers thus acting, rather paradoxically, to further enfeeble the very system they want to preserve.
This paper discusses this dilemma lived by Courts by examining Brazil’s Supreme Court (STF) rulings. It argues that the STF has simultaneously played a key role in buttressing Brazil democracy and created new challenges for its preservation
Constitutions matter and they matter fundamentally. They have the potential to play a significant role in processes of change. They do so by way of their symbolic resonance, but also by entrenching basic rights and thus offering real avenues for contestations of power. Constitutions are fundamentally about power – laying out its distribution. Inclusion in constitutional politics gives women more power to unsettle long-standing patriarchal hierarchies in the constitutional order. Their involvement in decision making about the design of constitutional structures of power gives them the opportunity to reshape those structures in a more inclusive manner. In this paper, focusing on the Sabarimala Temple Entry judgment, I examine the place of women’s equality in the Indian Constitution as a substantive matter and how it has been interpreted by the judiciary. My aim to further develop understandings of justice that will constitutionalize women’s equality rights.
Shibboleth, a password, a sound design to draw distinctions. When it is wrong pronounced, it is exclusionary. “Ear of grain,” it literally means. It became a test word. A shibboleth to identify the enemy. Paul Celan wrote in 1955 a poem with this name. In Celan’s poem, crying out shibboleth is searching for nothing because his homeland was already pulled down by the Nazis. He uses many shibboleths, but the whole world has gone. Only memory could make justice to him. To put it bluntly, a constitution cannot only a form of analytical regulation of rights and institutions. A constitution should aim at a form of redemption through the elimination of citizenships and borders. In this term, redemption means full integration of the foreigner without any distinction. I will seek to explain how we could reach a global consciousness that can change the grammar of the “I” through a “constitutional redemption.”