The debate between the proponents of popular and political constitutionalism, on the one hand, and legal constitutionalism, on the other, is a testament to the debate between conservative and liberal approaches. Such an interpretation of law is conceivable through values in law, but for a proper interpretation, the interpreter must be endowed with certain virtues in order to preserve the integrity of legal matter and faith in social progress and free development of a person as a selfsufficient individual.

The purpose of the study is to determine the extent to which virtues and values influence the effectiveness of the constitution. By revealing the essence of the main doctrines of constitutionalism (popular, political and legal), the author analyses the dilemma of freedom and security in law. Understanding the correlation between chaos and order reveals the importance of an institutionally capable state as a space of security for its citizens.

 Virtues in law play a crucial role in the organisation of society, in the context of which the role of the virtues of militant democracy, the debate between the proponents of originalism and the concept of a “living” constitution will be emphasised. Virtues in law define the modus operandi for the implementation of certain values, which are based on social consensus and determine the organisation of society and government. The debate between representatives of popular and political constitutionalism and legal constitutionalism shows that law provides more just outcomes as a result of social and political debate. Popular constitutionalism, on the other hand, appeals to a kind of mobilisation that favours the means of direct democracy. Political constitutionalism appeals to the political expression of the will of the people and gives priority to the supremacy of parliament. Legal constitutionalism counteracts both approaches, as the former is a dangerous emanation of the use of direct democracy to curtail the foundations of the constitutional order, and the idea of parliamentary supremacy is fraught with the majority ignoring the interests of the minority, both of which have the potential to lead to human rights violations. Legal constitutionalism emphasises the protection of human rights, which determines the standards of functioning of government institutions.

 However, the values that are consensual in society are not enough to protect the constitutional order. The constitutional order is the result of the interaction of people who are endowed with certain virtues. In particular, such a legal principle-value as proportionality is always subject to criticism due to its ambivalence – it can be used to restrict human rights and to determine the permissible limits of state activity. The question is who will determine these limits and to what parameters. Decision-makers should be endowed with certain virtues, such as fairness, courage, integrity, etc. In practical terms, this is achieved through socio-political debate when we talk about legislation or regulations, and legal argumentation when we talk about good governance or an independent and impartial court. The ability to weigh arguments and take into account the social context, including the systematic nature of the facts about certain phenomena, leads to a responsible and virtuous decision-making process that is grounded in the fundamental values and principles of law.

Bibliography

Authored books

1. Bellamy R, Political Constitutionalism: A Republican Defence of the Constitutionality of Democracy (Cambridge University Press 2007).

2. Conway G, The Limits of Legal Reasoning and the European Court of Justice (Cambridge University Press 2012).

3. Horak F, Střet hodnot. Funkcionální analýza konstruktů rovnosti, svobody, spravedlivosty a důstojnosti v ústavneprávní argumentaci (Leges 2022).

4. Kramer L D, The people themselves: popular constitutionalism and judicial review (Oxford University Press 2004).

5. Meron T, Human Rights and Humanitarian Norms as Customary Law (Clarendon Press 1989).

6. Schmitt C, Political Theology: Four Chapters on the Concept of Sovereignty (University of Chicago Press 2005).

 Edited and translated books

7. Belov M (ed), Populist Constitutionalism and Illiberal Democracies. Between Constitutional Imagination, Normative Entrenchment and Political Reality (Intersentia 2022).

 8. Gross O, ‘Constitutions and Emergency Regimes’ in T Ginsburg, R Dixon (eds), Comparative Constitutional Law (Edward Elgar 2011).

9. Hirschl R, ‘On the Blurred Matrix of Comparative Constitutional Law’ in Sujit Choudry (ed), The Migration of Constitutional Ideas (Cambridge University Press 2006).

10. Müller J‐W, ‘Populism and Constitutionalism’ in Cristóbal Rovira Kaltwasser (ed) et al., The Oxford Handbook of Populism (Oxford University Press 2017) 590–606.

11. Erkhard L, Dobrobut dlia vsikh (per z nim V Senyka, A Lapchak, Vell Buks 2023).

12. Kun T, Struktura naukovykh revoliutsii (per z anhl, Port-Royal 2001).

13. Shmidt-Assmann E, Zahalne administratyvne pravo yak ideia vrehuliuvannia. Osnovni zasady ta zavdannia systematyky administratyvnoho prava (per z nim, K.I.S. 2009).

Journal articles

14. Baker T E, ‘Constitutional Theory in a Nutshell’ (2004) 13 William & Mary Bill Rights Journal 61. 15. Bertrall L, Ross II, ‘Administrative Constitutionalism as Popular Constitutionalism’ (2019) 167 University of Pennsylvania Law Review 1792.

16. Cannilla A, ‘Political constitutionalism in the age of populism’ (2022) 26 Revus <https://doi. org/10.4000/revus.8039>.

17. Cebrovski A, Garstka J, ‘Network-Centric Warfare: Its Origin and Future’ (Proceedings, 1998, Jan.) <http://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/1998-01/network-centric-warfare-itsoriginand-future> (accessed: 16.01.2024).

18. Gee G, ‘The Political Constitution and the Political Right’ [2019] 30 (1) King’s Law Journal 148–72.

19. Goldmann M, ‘The European Economic Constitution after the PSPP Judgment: Towards Integrative Liberalism?’ (2020) 21 (5) German Law Journal 1058–77.

20. Griffith JAG, ‘The Political Constitution’ (1979) 42 MLR 1–21.

21. Hellwig H-J, ‘Die Verhältnismäßigkeit als Hebel gegen die Union: Ist die Ultra-viresKontrolle des BVerfG in der Sache Weiss noch mit dem Grundsatz der Gewaltenteilung vereinbar?’ (2020) 73 (35) Neue Juristische Wochenschrift 2497–503.

22. Höpner M, ‘Proportionality and Karlsruhe’s Ultra Vires. Ways Out of Constitutional Pluralism?’ [2021] 21 (1) MPIfG Discussion Paper <https://pure.mpg.de/rest/items/ item_3283151/component/file_3283887/content> (accessed: 16.01.2024).

23. Kramer L D, ‘Popular Constitutionalism, circa 2004’ [2004] 92 (4) California Law Review 959-1011.

24. Leckey R, ‘Remedial Practice Beyond Constitutional Text’ [2016] 64 (1) The American Journal of Comparative Law 1–35.

25. Macey J R, ‘Originalism as an “Ism”’ (1996) 19 Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy 301.

26. O’Neill J G, ‘Raoul Berger and the Restoration of Originalism’ (2001) 96 N.U.L. Rev. 253.

27. Post R, Siegel R, ‘Popular Constitutionalism, Departmentalism, and Judicial Supremacy’ (2004) 92 California Law Review 1030.

28. Post R, Siegel R, ‘Protecting the constitution from the people: juricentric restrictions on section five power’ (2003) 78 Indiana Law Journal 33.

 29. Ribeiro G A, ‘What is constitutional interpretation?’ [2022] 20 (3) International Journal of Constitutional 1130–61.

30. Tomkins A, ‘The Republican Monarchy Revisited’ (2002) 19 Constitutional Commentary 737–60.

31. Tushnet M, ‘Popular Constitutionalism as Political Law’ (2006) 81 Chicago-Kent Law Review 999. 32. Wong M L, Cleland C E, Arend D Jr, Bartlett S, Cleaves H J 2nd, Demarest H, Prabhu A, Lunine J I, Hazen R M, ‘On the roles of function and selection in evolving systems’ (2023) 120 (43) PNAS <https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2310223120>.

33. Honcharov V, ‘Vid staroi teorii tlumachennia do novoi: osnovni vyklyky ta rishennia’ (2014) 1–2 Filosofiia prava i zahalna teoriia prava 56.

Conference papers

34. Volpato G, Stocchetti A, ‘Old and new approaches to marketing. The quest of their epistemological roots’ v The proceedings of 10th International Conference Marketing Trends (January 2009) <https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/30841> (accessed: 16.01.2024).

Websites

35. Blokker P, ‘Populist Constitutionalism’ (Verfassungblog, 04.05.2017) <https://verfassungsblog. de/populist-constitutionalism> (accessed: 16.01.2024).

36. Murrill B J, ‘Modes of Constitutional Interpretation’ (EveryCRSReport, 15.03.2018) <https:// www.everycrsreport.com/reports/R45129.html> (accessed: 16.01.2024).

37. The Federalist Papers: No. 28 <https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed28.asp> (accessed: 16.01.2024).