Sovereignty Reconfigured: Populism, Constitutional Democracy, And the Crisis of Legitimacy
Abstract
The background of this study is the global resurgence of populist movements that challenge the foundational principles of constitutional democracy. From the United States to Hungary, from Brazil to Italy, populist leaders have come to power by claiming to represent the true people against corrupt elites, and in doing so, they have systematically weakened the institutions of liberal democracy. The problem addressed is that this populist challenge is not merely a political phenomenon but a fundamental reconceptualization of sovereignty itself. Populism offers a new account of where legitimate authority resides, an account that stands in direct opposition to the constitutionalist understanding of sovereignty as dispersed, constrained, and procedural. The aim of this article is to analyse this reconceptualization and to assess its implications for democratic legitimacy. The method employed is a theoretical analysis drawing on the work of Carl Schmitt, Jürgen Habermas, and contemporary political theorists, combined with comparative case studies of populist governance. The contemporary relevance is evident in the erosion of judicial independence, the capture of electoral commissions, and the concentration of executive power across multiple democracies. The conclusion argues that the crisis of legitimacy is not a crisis of democracy as such but a crisis of the constitutionalist model of democracy. Resolving this crisis requires a defence of constitutionalism that addresses the genuine grievances that populism exploits, while firmly rejecting the populist claim that sovereignty can be located in a single, unified popular will.