Digital Humanities, Social Science and Cultural Preservation
Philosophical Foundations and Constitutional Durability: a Comparative Analysis of Constitutional Success in the U.S., Liberia, Nigeria, and Japan
Abstract
Opatola Peter Ademola
This paper argues that constitutions succeed only when they reflect the philosophical foundations, social norms, and national identity of the society they govern. Treating constitutions as transferable institutional templates ignores the necessity of political struggle, negative definition, and the articulation of collective philosophy.
Using a political theory–driven lens, the paper examines the United States, Japan, Liberia, and Nigeria to illustrate how the presence or absence of these elements shapes constitutional durability. The United States demonstrates organic success, emerging from a struggle against monarchy that clarified what society would not accept and facilitated rigorous philosophical debate. Japan shows adaptive success, where defeat and occupation imposed a constitution that was domesticated through local norms of harmony and consensus. Liberia illustrates failure through blind imitation of the American model, imposed without alignment to indigenous norms. Nigeria exemplifies chronic constitutional instability driven by independence without struggle, lack of shared philosophy, and repeated attempts to import foreign institutional forms.
The paper concludes that constitutional durability is explained not by design alone, but by the alignment of constitutions with political identity forged through struggle and deliberation.