Sieyès via Rousseau
This chapter traces the gradual emergence of the distinction between the constituted and the constituent power in the work of Sieyès, using Rousseau as the main source of comparison. It examines how Sieyès constructed constituent power as an extra-legal force and identifies the key juridical implications of his views. Part I briefly considers some uses of the term ‘constituent power’ before Sieyès and outside the context of the French Revolution. Part II examines Sieyès’ early pamphlets, where he puts forward his initial understanding of the power to be exercised by the nation’s representatives in the Estates-General. This approach, it will be seen in Part III, led him to propose the creation of a supreme constitution that ensured that the (representative) law-making power acted consistently with the general will. Part IV of the chapter focuses on Sieyès’ main published work, What is the Third Estate?, which contains a more developed formulation of the distinction between constituent and constituted power, as well as about the nature of representation. In that work, one can also see a transformation of Sieyès’ conception of the legislative power, one that brought him further than ever away from Rousseau. Finally, the chapter considers the role of extra-ordinary representatives in Sieyès’ conception of constitution-making and constitutional reform.