I was recently asked a very interesting question, somewhat related to legal history: namely, what is constitutional autochthony?
‘Autochthony’ is a word that rarely surfaces in everyday English, but it is a synonym for ‘native’ or ‘indigenous’. It is most often used in anthropology, biology and related sciences, but is also used in law. The formal definition is: 1. Originating where found; indigenous: as in ‘autochthonous rocks’; an ‘autochthonous people’ 2. Originating or formed in the place where found, such as an ‘autochthonous blood clot.’ It derives from the Greek, meaning ‘springing from the land’. You can find the definition at: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/autochthony
When referring to ‘constitutional autochthony’, one is therefore referring to the nativity or indigenous nature of a constitution. This has two practical applications in that context: when referring to a constitution that emerges internally from a jurisdiction or country, meaning that it is free from external legal control and influence; or when referring to a constitution that is redrafted, amended or otherwise remade to ‘reclaim’ it as being autonomous and native. When talking about this last meaning — reclamation– this often has occurred when countries achieved independence from colonial powers. Post-colonial countries amend or replace these constitutions with ones developed in the native country, as they are considered more legitimate and authentic and therefore more valid and enforceable. Specific examples include the redrafting of the Irish constitution in 1937 (and previous amendments to the 1922 constitution), India in 1949, Zambia in 1991 (replacing the constitution of 1973) and South Africa in 1996.
Constitutional autochthony is therefore concerned both with the autonomy of the government that has adopted the constitution, as well as with the indigenous (‘native’) nature of the constitution.
For an interesting discussion of the Australian context and how this may be achieved for Australia, see http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/FedLRev/2001/10.html
Hi–short but helpful– I was looking this up for a Intro to Constitutional Law course and it’s spot on. thanks!
A word that is hard enough to spell, but sometimes even harder to understand! thanks for the clarification, which I saw posted on your profile on linkedin. Looks like an interesting program you’ve got going on, in addition to everything else you are doing! regards, S. Weyland
It has eased my burden in understanding what constitutional autochthony is.I did not get it well in class but now it is halleluya!I can now do my assignment without any problem, thanks alot!
I am very glad to hear it! thank you for taking the time to write!
Hi Prof Pilarczyk– I actually had this question come up in the contect of an international law course and found this write-up very helful. thanks!
Wow, that’s so interesting!I cannot wait for the next articles from you. Take care! Amanda
Wonderful! Thank you!
never heard of this word until today that my lecturer gave me an assignment and thank u prof for writing something on it
Thanks for your explicit explanation. Now I have a background knowledge of what constitutional autochthony is. I found it difficult to understand in class before but now am good to go.
…helpful but short.
thanks it helped for my assignment
happy it was helpful! thanks for writing.
Thenks for for the good job
Its really helpful Thanx , Thank you very much
my pleasure!
Awesome thanks I came across it during my studies on constitutional law and had problems internalizing it
Wonderful job you have done here! Constitutional authochthony gave me a hell of time to comprehend until I stumbled into your write up in the course of my research. You really have made my study easier. Thx a bunch.
You are most welcome! thanks for taking the time to write.
Thanks Prof. I find this writeup very useful for constitutional law
very useful article.thankyou very much. Its really helpful for my studies .
Glad to hear it! Thank you for taking the time to post.
VERY EXPLANATORY AND EASY TO UNDERSTAND WRITE UP THANKS SO MUCH PROF YOU MADE IT MUCH EASIER FOR ME TO DO MY PAPER ON THIS TOPIC
i find this definition very useful and it made me understand the comparative meanings of the word as in anthropology, biology/medicine and in law
DearSir,
I am from Sri Lanka. We were a British colony and obtained our independence in 1948. Yet the Constitution made us subjects of the British Empire and the Queen was recognised as the Head of State via a n appointed Governor General. In 1972 a new Republican constitution was introduced as an Autochthonous Constitution. This Constitution was again changed in 1978 to introduce a Presidential system which was a hybrid of the French/American and British systems. This Constitution has been amended 19 times and has taken away the Citizens Sovereignty and made our so called elected representatives our Masters. Now we seek to introduce a new constitution by using the next Presidential election and giving to the people a brand new iron caged constitution. We want to use the vote of the people as an endorsement of the new constitution and a mandate to implement it bypassing the extremely restrictive process defined in the 1978 constitution as the means to repeal it. Can this process qualify as an autochthonous means by which the people endorse the new proposed constitution? Your reply is greatly appreciated.