31.5.2022

María Luisa Balaguer Callejón, judge of the Constitutional Court and professor at the University of Malaga, speaker at the International Congress “The Liberal Triennium two hundred years later”.

- What did the Liberal Triennium mean in the history of constitutionalism and what remains of that spirit?

- It was a starting point, a very important paradigm change by giving a turn in history from the Constitution of Cadiz. Just as at the time the French Revolution breaks down positions in relation to the previous powers, here in a somewhat less universal sense, more limited and influenced also by the French Revolution and by the doctrine of England, by Locke, and even by the American one, a series of historical situations emerge that are very important today. As the minister said at the opening of the congress, the important values are democracy, division of powers, rights…

- However, rights such as universal suffrage were lacking. Do we have to interpret it with the eyes of other times?

- Of course, it is the origin of constitutionalism, as highlighted in the inaugural paper, and what at a certain moment matters for the origin of constitutionalism are the political parties and the press, which influence each other. Political parties are formations that are practically generated at that time, some more moderate and others less, what they intended at all times was the limitation of real power. The import of the concept of the division of powers is very important when in the constitutionalism of Spain it emerges as that power has to be limited, and this is what in the end is imposed on the Monarchy with little historical success, but from the dogmatic point of view to the constitutionalists allows us to draw an important line that begins there.

- It was also mentioned in the inauguration that Triennium is an example of how fragile these advances are, that at any time there can be a setback.

- The constitutionalism of the social state, where there is already a pact between the bourgeoisie and the working class reformulated by the state, or where the state is a third party that channels conflicts and tries to play in those positions, has been very valid, but there is a crisis now of the social state, because it depends not only on the ideology, but also on the economic situation and how the economicist parameters are considered. Right now in a society of digital platforms we find some States that legislate, but that legislation is not incumbent on other societies that are entering, limited companies, economic societies of importance and that exceed the State, so the State is currently in a certain irrelevance with regard to economic factors. This is a very important crisis.