Abstract:
A presumption exists that constitution-making is inherently and immediately appropriate for post-conflict scenarios. However, this paper will argue the converse presumption - that speedy constitution-making is inappropriate for post-conflict states. Broadly, this is because successful constitution-making is contingent on the presence of particular social and political conditions which are unlikely to exist in post-conflict states. Thus, it is more likely to result in the punitive exclusion of particular social groups; key groups may be insufficiently organized to contribute their perspectives; civil society assistance and public participation may be hard to guarantee; and decisions on collective identity may corset future political developments. Hasty post-conflict constitution-making may therefore burden the process with a legacy it cannot realistically achieve.
