Constitutional Design of Heterogeneous Societies
Authors: Syam Elvi Susanti , B. Sumiyati , Husen La Ode 
Published: June 2024

Objective: This paper sets out to explore the intricacies of the "Constitutional Design of Heterogeneous Society" utilizing the analytical lens of deconstruction. The primary objective is to dissect and comprehend how the constitution in diverse societies functions as a state consensus, offering legitimacy to agencies and institutions that represent the state. The focus extends beyond the mere governance of self-government, aiming to understand how this constitutional framework ensures democratic principles rooted in human rights.
 
Theoretical Framework: Embedded within the theoretical framework are perspectives from both liberianists and communitarianists. The paper delves into the ideologies of these schools of thought, seeking to understand their implications for the modern constitutional design in heterogeneous societies. The exploration unfolds as we scrutinize the constitution's role in regulating not only the satisfactions of being free but also navigating the delicate balance between individual desires and the collective vision of the society.
 
Methodology: Employing deconstruction analysis as the chosen methodology, this paper aims to unravel the layers embedded in the constitutional design of heterogeneous societies. Deconstruction, as a critical tool, allows us to dissect the elements that constitute the constitution, unveiling the nuanced relationships between state agencies, institutions, and citizens. Through this methodological approach, we endeavor to offer a comprehensive and insightful examination of the complex dynamics at play.
 
Results: The analysis reveals a profound conclusion regarding the constitution in heterogeneous societies. It emerges as a state consensus meticulously documented to provide legitimacy for agencies and institutions, portraying them as an "artificial man" vested with the power to regulate citizens. The emphasis lies not solely on self-government but, significantly, on guaranteeing democratic principles anchored in human rights. This exploration draws from the perspectives of liberianists and communitarianists, asserting that the modern constitutional design serves as a constitution in the narrow sense, meticulously regulating the satisfactions of being free.
 
Conclusion: In the culmination of this paper, we arrive at a compelling conclusion regarding the constitutional design of heterogeneous societies. The constitution, far from being a mere legal document, emerges as a pivotal state consensus. It provides legitimacy to institutions, portraying them as artificial entities tasked with the responsibility of exercising power to regulate citizens. Crucially, the focus of this regulation extends beyond self-government to encompass democratic principles grounded in human rights. As espoused by liberianists and communitarianists, the modern constitutional design is revealed to be a meticulous regulator of the satisfactions of being free, distinguishing it from the unbridled pursuit of individual desires.
 
Originality/Value: The originality and value of this paper lie in its innovative use of deconstruction analysis to illuminate the nuanced dimensions of constitutional design in heterogeneous societies. By amalgamating perspectives from liberianists and communitarianists, this work contributes to the discourse by offering a unique perspective on the constitution's role in regulating freedom and democracy within diverse social contexts. It brings to light the significance of democratic principles rooted in human rights and emphasizes the delicate balance between individual liberties and collective well-being. In doing so, this paper adds a fresh layer of understanding to the evolving landscape of constitutional studies.