Waarom eigenlijk?

Abstract

The authors of the proposals for a new constitution have performed their task skilfully, but their task was ill-conceived. Technical reasons are mainly given as arguments for the drafting of the Concept: the present constitution was considered to be too lengthy and inconveniently arranged. With regard to these arguments, the author fails to see why the old text, which has proved its usefulness for the past 150 years, should disappear. The interpretations provided by constitutional lawyers are at present sufficient to understand the constitution. The author objects even more to the proposed substantial innovations, such as the changes in the legislative procedure, because, as far as there has been a real input of the political parties, this input is 8 or 12 years old (Van Schaik Commission 1954, Donner Commission 1958). For the more recent developments the authors of the Concept have been guided by their own ‘civil servants’ attitude, which is a-political or even anti-political. Proposals for political innovations should be initiated by the political parties, and not by a number of anonymous civil servants. Finally, the Concept in no way solves the great political problems of our country, such as the diminishing governability of the country resulting from the insufficient operation of the patty system.