Adaptive constitutionalism as a paradigm of proactive constitutional design: towards a strategy of constitutional resilience

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

Modern constitutional theory and practice face a fundamental challenge posed by the growing gap between the static nature of the fundamental law and the dynamics of global transformations. The traditional model of constitutional lawmaking, historically developed as a reaction to specific crises, demonstrates a systemic inability to proactively ensure the stability of the political order in conditions of chronic uncertainty. This issue is especially relevant in an era of accelerated technological progress, global pandemics, hybrid conflicts, and the erosion of liberal democratic institutions. The central contradiction lies in the tension between the demand for the constitution to be an immutable foundation of statehood and the need for its flexible transformation in response to changing realities. The subject of the study is the concept of "adaptive constitutionalism," which combines elements of proactive constitutional design, the doctrine of the "living constitution," and strategies for constitutional resilience. The article analyzes institutional mechanisms capable of ensuring the adaptation of the constitutional order without undermining its stability and legitimacy. Special attention is given to the dual nature of adaptive mechanisms, which can be used both to strengthen democracy and to legitimize authoritarian transformation. The methodological basis of the research is a comparative legal method supplemented by formal legal analysis, a historical-legal approach, and systemic analysis to study the interconnections between the elements of the constitutional order. The scientific novelty of the study lies in the systemic integration of disparate approaches into a unified theoretical model that views the constitution as a complex, self-organizing system capable of internal transformation without losing its identity. The proposed "concentric structure" of adaptive constitution, in which an immutable constitutional core is surrounded by areas of strategic resilience and operational adaptability, overcomes the artificial opposition between stability and flexibility. The study reveals the dual nature of adaptive mechanisms and develops a system of institutional "safeguards" against their instrumentalization in authoritarian contexts. The practical significance of the paradigm is manifested in the formation of specific tools for legislators, courts, and civil society, including innovative digital technologies for civic participation. Russian constitutional practice demonstrates the potential for developing adaptive mechanisms through the activation of expert institutions and the digitalization of public participation procedures.

About the authors

Sergei Yur'evich Poyarkov

Email: psu70@bk.ru

References

  1. Elster J. The Political Psychology of Constitution Making // In: Elster J., Gargarella R., Naresh V., Rasch B.E. (eds.). Constituent Assemblies. Comparative Constitutional Law and Policy. – Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018. – P. 207-246.
  2. Coyne C.J. Constitutions and crisis // Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization. – 2011. – Vol. 80, No. 2. – P. 351-357.
  3. Nwokora Z. Constitutional design for dynamic democracies: A framework for analysis // International Journal of Constitutional Law. – 2022. – Vol. 20, No. 2. – P. 580-610. doi: 10.1093/icon/moac030 EDN: BBTURZ.
  4. Strauss D.A. Do We Have a Living Constitution? // Drake Law Review. – 2011. – Vol. 59. – P. 973-984.
  5. Киричек Е.В., Кононов Е.А., Кодирзода Г.Н. The constitution of the Russian Federation and constitutional identity in the context of global changes // SHS Web of Conferences. IX Baltic Legal Forum “Law and Order in the Third Millennium”, Kaliningrad, 2021. – С. 01003. doi: 10.1051/shsconf/202110801003 EDN: SAKWEC.
  6. Jakab A. Constitutional Resilience // In: Grote R., Lachenmann F., Wolfrum R. (eds.). Max Planck Encyclopedia of Comparative Constitutional Law [MPECCoL]. – Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2022.
  7. Поярков С.Ю. Адаптивный конституционализм: концептуальные основания и институциональные механизмы в условиях политико-правовой турбулентности // Административное и муниципальное право. 2025. № 3. С. 67-85. doi: 10.7256/2454-0595.2025.3.74695 EDN: OYYMQE URL: https://nbpublish.com/library_read_article.php?id=74695
  8. Юнусов Э.А., Жеребцова Е.Н. Современный конституционализм: теория и перспективы развития // Вестник Московского университета МВД России. – 2015. – № 10. – С. 76-80. EDN: VKBIEZ.
  9. Nwokora Z. The Case for Dynamic Provisions in Constitutional Design. – URL: https://www.psa.ac.uk/sites/default/files/78_46.pdf (дата обращения: 05.11.2025).
  10. Dyzenhaus D., Diamond A. The Resilient Constitution // In: Linares Cantillo A., Valdivieso-León C., García-Jaramillo S. (eds.). Constitutionalism: Old Dilemmas, New Insights. – Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2021 (online edn 22 July 2021).
  11. Парсонс Т. Социальная система. – М.: Академический проект, 2018. – 530 с.
  12. Луман Н. Общество как социальная система / пер. с нем. А. Антоновский. – М.: Издательство "Логос", 2004. – 232 с. EDN: PWOOCR.
  13. Ginsburg T. (ed.). Comparative Constitutional Design. – Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012. – 406 p.
  14. Эриашвили Н.Д., Сарбаев Г.М., Кухарев А.В. Сравнительно-правовой анализ Конституции Российской Федерации и Конституции Соединённых Штатов Америки // Образование и право. – 2021. – № 9. – С. 83-87. doi: 10.24412/2076-1503-2021-9-83-87 EDN: ZSRUCH.
  15. Васильева Т. Конституционные реформы в Италии: бесконечный поиск ускользающего результата // Сравнительное конституционное обозрение. – 2018. – № 4 (125). – С. 85-99. doi: 10.21128/1812-7126-2018-4-85-99 EDN: RXLOVL.
  16. Червонюк В.И. Трансформация идеи "живой конституции" в российской конституционной практике // Право и государство: теория и практика. – 2020. – № 2 (182). – С. 124-128.
  17. Howes E.C. Living Tree Doctrines of the Canadian Constitution and Indigenous Law // Dalhousie Journal of Legal Studies. – 2022. – Vol. 31. – P. 31-51.
  18. Туровский Р.Ф. Субнациональная политика: введение к возможной теории // Полития: Анализ. Хроника. Прогноз. – 2014. – № 4 (75). – С. 86-99. EDN: VBUZGL.
  19. Вазикова И.А. Конституционный контроль в субъектах Российской Федерации: за и против конституционной реформы // Вестник Российского университета кооперации. – 2023. – № 3 (53). – С. 114-118. EDN: RTIKBQ.
  20. Карасев А.Т., Савоськин А.В., Мещерягина В.А. Конституционные советы Республик Адыгея, Башкортостан, Татарстан и Саха (Якутия): кто в лес, кто по дрова? // Российское право: образование, практика, наука. – 2023. – № 2. – С. 58-67. doi: 10.34076/2410_2709_2023_2_58 EDN: IBYDJW.
  21. Евсиков К.С. Механизмы реализации конституционного права граждан на участие в управлении делами государства // Журнал российского права. – 2019. – № 6 (270). – С. 36-49. EDN: JHQSCT.
  22. Сафонов М.С., Биктимиров М.Р. Еще раз об экспертах, независимой экспертизе и экспертных советах // Государственная служба. – 2021. – Т. 23. – № 4 (132). – С. 71-75.
  23. Lijphart A. Thinking About Democracy: Power Sharing and Majority Rule in Theory and Practice. – London & New York: Routledge, 2008. – 316 p.
  24. Fichera M. Framing EU constitutional time: a future-oriented theory of constitutional change for the EU // Journal of International and Comparative Law. – 2020. – Vol. 7, No. 2. – P. 409-426.
  25. Giuseppe. Constitutions, Openness and Comparative Law // Estudios de Deusto. – 2019. – Vol. 67, No. 1. – P. 111-124.
  26. Burnham M.A. Constitution-Making in South Africa – Boston Review (online). – URL: https://www.bostonreview.net/articles/constitution-making-in-south-africa/ (дата обращения: 02.11.2025).
  27. Arai-Takahashi Y. Proportionality – a German approach // Amicus Curiae. – Issue 19, July 1999. – P. 11-13.
  28. Porat I. Proportionality // In: Grote R., Lachenmann F., Wolfrum R. (eds.). Max Planck Encyclopedia of Comparative Constitutional Law. – Oxford: Oxford University Press, March 2018.
  29. Stone Sweet A., Mathews J. Proportionality, Balancing and Global Constitutionalism // Columbia Journal of Transnational Law. – 2008–2009. – Vol. 47. – P. 72-164.
  30. Alexy R. Ustavne pravice in sorazmernost / Ustavna prava i proporcionalnost. – 2014. – № 22. – P. 51-65.
  31. Chachko E., Linos K. Emergency Powers for Good // William & Mary Law Review. – 2024. – Vol. 66. – P. 1-71.
  32. Raj K. France's Counterterrorism Bill Normalizes Emergency Practices – Human Rights Watch (news). – 25 Sep 2017. – URL: https://www.hrw.org/news/2017/09/25/frances-counterterrorism-bill-normalizes-emergency-practices (дата обращения: 02.11.2025).
  33. Mross K. The Fragile Road Towards Peace and Democracy: Insights on the Effectiveness of International Support to Post-Conflict Burundi // DIE Discussion Paper No. 3/2015. – 2015. – 75 p.
  34. Elkins Z., Ginsburg T., Melton J. The Endurance of National Constitutions. – Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009. – 272 p.
  35. Dixon R., Landau D. Abusive Constitutional Borrowing: Legal globalization and the subversion of liberal democracy // Oxford Comparative Constitutionalism. – Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2021. – 240 p.
  36. Ginsburg T., Huq A.Z., Khaitan T. (eds.). The Entrenchment of Democracy: The Comparative Constitutional Design of Elections, Parties and Voting. – Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2024. – 282 p.
  37. Landau D. Abusive Constitutionalism // University of California, Davis Law Review. – 2013. – Vol. 47. – P. 189-260.
  38. Tushnet M. Authoritarian Constitutionalism // Cornell Law Review. – 2015. – Vol. 100. – P. 391-462.
  39. Kumar S. Comparative Analysis of Constitutional Amendment Processes: A Worldwide Investigation // International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews. – 2024. – Vol. 5, No. 5. – P. 5180–5184.
  40. Ip E.C. The Rise of Hybrid Constitutionalism // In: Hybrid Constitutionalism: The Politics of Constitutional Review in the Chinese Special Administrative Regions. – Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2019. – P. 1-31.
  41. Skowronek S., Orren K. The Adaptability Paradox: Constitutional Resilience and Principles of Good Government in Twenty-First-Century America // Perspectives on Politics. – 2020. – Vol. 18, No. 2. – P. 354-369.
  42. Holmes S. Constitutions and constitutionalism // The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Constitutional Law / ed. by Michel Rosenfeld, András Sajó. – Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013. – P. 191-216.
  43. Tsebelis G. Cultural Theories of Constitutional Amendments // In: Changing the Rules: Constitutional Amendments in Democracies. – Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2025. – P. 76-98.
  44. Siegel R.B. Constitutional Culture, Social Movement Conflict and Constitutional Change: The Case of the De Facto Era // California Law Review. – 2006. – Vol. 94, No. 5. – P. 1323-1419.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download

Согласие на обработку персональных данных

 

Используя сайт https://journals.rcsi.science, я (далее – «Пользователь» или «Субъект персональных данных») даю согласие на обработку персональных данных на этом сайте (текст Согласия) и на обработку персональных данных с помощью сервиса «Яндекс.Метрика» (текст Согласия).