International Conference on Constitutional Preambles

In their opening remarks, the organizers, Kálmán Pócza and Asanga Welikala, emphasized that the study of preambles is especially timely today, as these introductory texts are not merely historical curiosities but key sources for understanding constitutional principles and the self-definition of political communities.

Keynote Addresses:

• Jonathan Gienapp (Stanford University) discussed how, at the time of its adoption, the preamble of the United States Constitution was understood by its framers as a normative part of the Constitution, but over time came to be treated largely as a decorative or symbolic element.
• Paul Cliteur (University of Leiden) addressed the dilemmas of European sovereignty, noting that preambles often remain “silent” actors in the tensions between national and supranational competences.

Panel Discussions

Panel I: Legal and Political Theory of the Preambles

The opening panel provided a theoretical foundation from both political science and constitutional theory. Bogdan Szlachta offered a historical overview of the evolution of preambles and the changing concept of the “constitutional subject.” Justin Frosini argued that preambles are not merely declarative statements but essential anchors of constitutional interpretation, through which the constitution as a whole becomes intelligible.Nomi Claire Lazar highlighted that preambles function as “technologies of meaning transmission” and as components of “constitutional framing,” drawing attention to the ways in which they shape constitutional meaning and temporal perspective.

Panel II: Comparative Perspectives: Europe and America

In his presentation, Balázs Fekete analysed European constitutional preambles, arguing, first, that no single European model exists, yet growing signs of substantive convergence can nonetheless be observed. Márton Sulyok, in a metaphorical approach, described the preamble as “the heart of the constitution.” In his interpretation, a constitution operates effectively when the “heart” (identity, emotion) and the “brain” (its drafters and interpreters) remain in dynamic balance, complemented by democratic feedback mechanisms.

Panel III: Comparative Perspectives: Africa and the Islamic World

This panel turned toward non-Western constitutional traditions. Adeno Addis examined the diversity of African preambles, while Asanga Welikala provided an extensive analysis of preambles in the Islamic world, highlighting the specific tensions between Islamic legal traditions, historical experiences and modern forms of state identity.

Panel IV: Comparative Perspectives: Latin America and Asia

René Tapia discussed the distinctive features of Latin American preambles, addressing the legacy of Spanish legal and historical influence as well as current constitution-making trends in the region. The joint presentation by Jakub Babuska, George Varughese and Asanga Welikala offered a detailed comparative examination of Asian preambles, illustrating the various ways in which cultural, religious and historical particularities manifest themselves in these texts.

Panel V: Comparative Perspectives: Central and Eastern Europe

In the closing panel, Iván Halász analysed the post-1989 evolution of the Czech and Slovak constitutional preambles, as well as the ways in which notions of national identity and statehood appear in their current formulations. Frane Staničić explored the constitutional specificities of Croatia and the broader Balkan region, with special attention to how historical fault lines and state-building processes are reflected in the language of the preambles. Concluding the panel, Balázs Schanda and Kálmán Pócza examined the interpretive possibilities of the Hungarian Fundamental Law’s preamble, outlining its legal framework and value-oriented messages.

The conference contributed to a deeper understanding of the multifaceted role of constitutional preambles: they simultaneously function as elements of identity formation, historical narrative, and guides for constitutional interpretation. It also demonstrated that preambles continue to play a fundamental - though often underestimated - role in contemporary constitutional thought, their significance frequently exceeding what their concise wording might suggest.