Constitutional inclusion in divided societies: Conceptual choices, practical dilemmas and the contribution of the grassroots in Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland
| Published date | 01 September 2023 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/00108367221147790 |
| Author | Joanne McEvoy,Jennifer Todd |
| Date | 01 September 2023 |
https://doi.org/10.1177/00108367221147790
Cooperation and Conflict
2023, Vol. 58(3) 393 –413
© The Author(s) 2023
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/00108367221147790
journals.sagepub.com/home/cac
Constitutional inclusion in
divided societies: Conceptual
choices, practical dilemmas
and the contribution of the
grassroots in Northern Ireland
and the Republic of Ireland
Joanne McEvoy and Jennifer Todd
Abstract
Processes of constitutional discussion increasingly invite widespread popular inclusion and
participation. Conceptual and practical problems remain, not least the respects in which inclusion
is to take place. In deeply divided places, these challenges are intensified, first in the difficulties
of conceptualising inclusion, and second in the practical dangers participation may pose to peace.
We tackle these problems empirically by looking at a hard case of constitutional discussion amid
division: the re-emergence of debate about Irish unity in Northern Ireland and the Republic of
Ireland. Through focus groups and interviews, we explore how ‘others’, disengaged from the main
political groups and defined transversally, approach the discussion, showing that they welcome
the prospect of participation and seek to remove discursive triggers of conflict by focussing
on shared everyday experience. We discuss the implications for the constitutional process
and the likely impact on polarisation. The analysis has implications for the literature on divided
societies, for constitutional theory and for policy. We argue that it is both possible and desirable
to remedy group exclusion while facilitating universalistic discussion and lessening the dangers of
polarisation. The policy implications are quite radical.
Keywords
constitutional inclusion, divided societies, Ireland, Northern Ireland
Introduction
Does popular inclusion and participation shape constitutional outcomes? And if so, how?
These questions are central to the theory and practice of constitution-making. In recent
decades, popular participation in constitution-making has been a priority for policymak-
ers and an emergent international norm. Including citizens in such processes is expected
Corresponding author:
Joanne McEvoy, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen AB24 3QY, UK.
Email: j.mcevoy@abdn.ac.uk
1147790CAC0010.1177/00108367221147790Cooperation and ConflictMcEvoy and Todd
research-article2023
Article
394 Cooperation and Conflict 58(3)
to reap a reward in terms of the quality and legitimacy of democracy. Yet, questions
remain about the theory and practice of inclusive, participatory constitutionalism: what
counts as inclusion, who is to be included, how the debate is best to be structured, what
issues are to be prioritised and what will be the impact of different choices. In particular,
there is little consensus on the value of what we call ‘radical inclusion’, not just of group
representatives but of a multiplicity of citizens defined in crosscutting ways, and con-
cerning not just choice of predefined options but also framing the constitutional values
and agenda. This paper explores the value of radical inclusion in deeply divided places.
In deeply divided places, where provisions for constitution-making and constitutional
change are often built into peace agreements (see Choudhry, 2008), the dilemmas are
intensified. First, the marginalised are many and diverse, for the political predominance
of the main ethno-political groups excludes not simply the economically disadvantaged
but a range of groups and a still greater range of issues and ideas. This problem has been
termed the ‘exclusion amid inclusion’ dilemma in power-sharing arrangements where
‘Others’ as individuals and groups who do not identify with the main identity groups
remain marginalised (Agarin et al., 2018). The problem is intensified in constitutional
discussions, for the views of these others – who give constitutional issues less priority –
may be a deciding factor in any future decision on constitutional change, for example, in
a constitutional referendum. Even conceptualising constitutional inclusion in such cir-
cumstances poses a major challenge.
Second, constitutional discussion is high stake politics, threatening the uneasy coex-
istence that characterises conflict to peace transitions by highlighting the issues of power,
authority and territory that were central to conflict. Participation is often seen as increas-
ing the danger of polarisation. The constitutional dilemma is whether to limit inclusion
to elites negotiating under strong central control, or instead to attempt a more inclusive
approach despite the plurality and multiplicity of the ‘others’ to be included.
We tackle these problems empirically and inductively by looking at a hard case of
constitutional discussion amid division, and how the ‘others’ marginalised by major
ethno-political divisions seek to address exclusion. We explore the constitutional
debates about Irish unification in Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland which
have re-emerged since Brexit in 2016. Northern Ireland is a devolved region of the
United Kingdom, founded with partition of the island of Ireland in 1920–1921 on the
insistence of the Protestant and unionist majority there, whose very existence was
accepted as legitimate by the nationalist and republican minority there only with the
Good Friday Agreement (GFA) of 1998. It is a post-conflict and still deeply divided
society, which manifests an evident ‘exclusion amid inclusion’ dilemma. The Republic
of Ireland is the other part of a divided island. Constitutional debate on Irish reunifi-
cation has recently re-emerged after Brexit, in the context also of demographic
change.1 The very discussion is widely perceived as potentially polarising, even
though the form and structure of a reunified Ireland is far from clear.2 In recent
research projects involving interviews and focus groups, we explored how ‘others’,
disengaged from the main political groups and defined transversally in terms of their
gender, generational or minority ethnic positioning rather than their political or reli-
gious identification, approach constitutional discussion. Do they converge or diverge
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting