Memory of the Marginals: The Constitutional Approach to Exclusion, Marginalization, and Stigmatization

Abstract This article examines the phenomenon of marginals—groups institutionally excluded or symbolically expelled from the constitutionally defined socio-political community. It investigates the dual dynamics of integration and disintegration, exploring the strategies, mechanisms, and tools that either foster inclusion or perpetuate exclusion, marginalization, and stigmatization. These processes are embedded in constitutional texts, collective memories, and narratives, manifesting through textual, visual, and performative constitutionalism. Adopting a socio-legal and constitutional-imaginary perspective, the study emphasizes not only formal exclusionary mechanisms but also symbolic practices that degrade and stigmatize, thereby shaping exclusionary constitutional imaginaries. In contrast, it also highlights imaginaries of inclusion to underscore the broader implications of these inclusion/exclusion dynamics on entrenched marginalization. A key focus is the role of exclusionary constitutional strategies and imaginaries in shaping constitutional memory politics. These imaginaries label marginals, establishing symbolic boundaries of “otherness” and “non-belongingness” that permeate both legal frameworks and societal perceptions. The article analyses the institutional and symbolic toolkit used to draw these distinctions, rooted in constitutional imaginaries and collective memory, drawing on works by scholars like Belov, Přibáň, and Komárek. It explores how these tools marginalize groups, depriving them of legitimate participation in the socio-political order. The analysis begins by outlining deliberate strategies of social disintegration, such as constitutional marginalization and stigmatization, before briefly addressing the constitution’s traditional role as a rational, integrative framework. While acknowledging the well-documented integrative mechanisms of democracy—elective, deliberative, participatory, and direct—the article assumes familiarity with these concepts and focuses instead on their counterparts: the models, processes, and instruments of constitutional disintegration. Partial disintegration, through exclusion and stigmatization, emerges as a central theme. The study also positions the constitution as a “memory project,” bridging law and politics. It examines collective memory and strategies of “exclusionary oblivion,” alongside retrospective constitutional imaginaries that reinforce marginalization. This includes a discussion of transitory memories and memory politics, illustrating how past exclusions shape contemporary constitutional narratives. In its final sections, the article juxtaposes constitutional imaginaries of inclusion and exclusion through two case studies. These contextualize the theoretical framework, grounding abstract concepts in practical examples. By doing so, the study not only critiques the mechanisms of marginalization but also underscores the potential for constitutional imaginaries to foster inclusion, offering a nuanced perspective on the ongoing tension between integration and disintegration within constitutional orders.