PhilArchive
open access
Does a Referendum Mandate Mean Unlimited Authority?
This article argues that the 2026 constitutional referendum conferred a powerful but limited democratic mandate rather than unlimited constituent authority. By distinguishing derivative authority from constitution-founding power, it contends that referendum legitimacy is constrained by the scope of the question presented to voters. Democratic reform, therefore, requires faithful implementation within the authorised framework rather than expansive reinterpretation that exceeds the mandate granted by the electorate.
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- A Mandate for Reform Is Not a Blank Cheque#689466
- Exercising Public Authority Beyond the State: Transnational Democracy and/or Alternative Legitimation Strategies#494071
- Public Library and Museums Act, 1964 and the transformation of the central government's role in public library administration in England(<Special feature>Library laws and their related legal issues from the international perspectives)#68828
- DM, In the Petition Of [2026] UKSC 32 (09 September 2026)#673993
- DM, In the Petition Of [2026] UKSC 32 (09 September 2026)#673960
Record · ID 709247
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive