Royal inviolability in Comparative Perspective: historical revision and contemporary interpretations

Abstract

Recalling García Pelayo, there are quite a few elements of the current democratic systems in which it would be possible to find, especially in formal terms, a certain harmonic homogeneity with their historical precedents or comparative law references. Of all of them, however, it seems that royal inviolability is one of the few —if not the only one— of the elements in which it is doubted whether the current constitutional provisions should be interpreted within the systematic framework that shelters them or whether, on the contrary, it is possible to circumvent this framework and rely on historical antecedents or comparative references to proceed with its interpretation. It would seem that, at least with respect to the royal statute, not only a certain suprapositive nature is defended, but even the supposed existence of an immovable pre-constitutional anchor, situated far from the reach of the sovereignty that resides in the people. From the perspective of Constitutional law, although without losing sight of historiography and, to a certain extent, Political psychology, this work addresses the study of this phenomenon, proceeding to a historical review of royal inviolability and an analysis of contemporary interpretations of it.