Political Representation and Constitutional Sovereignty

The interests of those represented are central to this discussion. It is a complex figure of the representative, but there is a third aspect to clarify the dilemma of Jean-Jacques Rousseau's position and the advocates of Indirect Constitutionalism.

The people are sovereign, and they remain so only to the extent that citizens have rights and freedoms. It is clear that the citizens who elect a representative do not transfer sovereignty, because if they did, they would no longer be sovereign. The representative represents the political interests of his district; all can be and needs to be resolved. It is then based on the fact that the representative must attend to a dual responsibility: as an MP, they should seek a common interest and resolve the other hand to the people. It only makes sense when you fulfill those two responsibilities.

Aspects of Political Representation

Restricting Participation in the Liberal State

Throughout the nineteenth century, there was a struggle for universal suffrage, ending in the early twentieth century when several countries carried out universal suffrage. One of the determinants of political participation is that restriction. The main argument is that political activity will be a mere instrument for "rational solutions" that are consistent with a model of society adjusted to the conception of the rights and freedoms of liberal constitutionalism. From the above idea, it is possible to have a discussion about what should raise interest in constitutional law. When we assume that we refer to these interests, we are taking the opportunity to differentiate between interests that are consistent with those budgets and interests that are not legitimate.

The reason is that constitutional claims must come into play only through those interests which arise spontaneously from these rights and freedoms of knowledgeable individual rights.

Constitutional Rights and Political Groups

In English Constitutionalism, progress was made through the distinction between two terms:

• Factions: This sets the stage for the recognition of political parties. It is a group with its own interest that only seeks to achieve that specific interest.
• Political Party: This can be configured as a group around a political orientation and assumes a constitutional function which is not designed to only reach its particular interest, but also that of the people.

Throughout the eighteenth century in England, there were two classical groups: liberals and moderates. They made possible the alternation of the position of government.

The case of France is different. There is a more radical rejection of the idea of recognizing groups and understanding that they can have a constitutional role. During the revolutionary period, the Assembly made a law that prohibited the recognition of political groups. There was a clear fear that through acceptance, the social forces of the Ancien Régime would have the strength to stop the Constitutional State.