Unclear constitution seen as the weak spot

The decline of democracy is increasingly visible around the world — and experts warn that Iceland may not be immune to that trend in the coming years.

This concern was among the topics discussed at the main session of Law Day (Lögfræðidagurinn), held today at the Hilton Nordica hotel in Reykjavík. The theme of the session was the current state of democracy and whether it now stands at a crossroads.

Speakers included Birgir Ármannsson, former MP and lawyer, who chaired the session; Kári Hólmar Ragnarsson, associate professor at the University of Iceland’s Faculty of Law; Ragnhildur Helgadóttir, professor of law and rector of Reykjavík University; and Silja Bára Ómarsdóttir, professor of political science and rector of the University of Iceland.
Panelists included MP Pawel Bartoszek, chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee, and Páll Þórhallsson, director at the Prime Minister’s Office.

“Democracy is in an existential crisis”

“Democracy is in an existential crisis,” said Silja Bára Ómarsdóttir in her address.
She noted that this applied in nearly all countries where democracy has taken root. The decline, she said, is visible and must be reversed.

Other speakers echoed her concerns, agreeing that democracy has weakened globally. Hungary and the United States were repeatedly cited as examples.

An unclear constitution a major weakness

Professor Ragnhildur Helgadóttir focused her talk on which aspects of Iceland’s constitutional system may limit or restrain undemocratic forces from seizing control of the state.
She noted that parliamentary rule serves as an important check on the power of government ministers. However, she also argued that Iceland’s main institutional weakness lies in its unclear constitution — particularly the ambiguous powers of the president.

“The constitution is unclear — there are many people who interpret it differently than has traditionally been done,” said Helgadóttir. “We have repeatedly seen presidential candidates who have much firmer ideas about the office than most have held.”

She explained that some candidates have interpreted the constitution to mean that the president could appoint ministers, dissolve parliament, and take other steps not supported by established precedent.

“This is a misunderstanding,” she said, “but the danger is that if someone wants to claim more power than the constitution allows, vague rules make that easier.”

Ultimately, voters hold the power

Asked whether Iceland’s political system has sufficient safeguards, Helgadóttir replied that it largely does — as long as the electorate remains vigilant.

“There are plenty of checks in place,” she said, “but if voters, election after election, choose to support semi-authoritarian ideas, there’s little in the constitution that can stop it — because, after all, we are a democracy.”