2026/03/03 by Arthur Ghins · 1 voice
Arts and Humanities · Social Sciences · #Political Theory and Influence #Rousseau and Enlightenment Thought #Seventeenth-Century Political and Philosophical Thought
paper · doi:10.1017/s0003055426101488
openalex publication_date 2026/03/03 · openalex created_date 2026/03/04 · openalex updated_date 2026/05/21
In recent decades, political theorists have drawn on historical thinkers to explore how political elites can be held accountable. Rousseau, however, is often dismissed as reducing accountability to elections and participation to occasional ratification referenda. This article challenges that view. While Rousseau expected an elective aristocracy to execute laws ratified by the people, he also identified two mechanisms—scrutiny and recall—through which citizens could control these representatives. After reconstructing Rousseau’s account, I consider how these mechanisms could be adapted to contemporary democracies. Focused on executive accountability, the model is particularly suited to presidential systems with directly elected presidents. It combines a national jury—a citizens’ assembly chosen by lot and tasked with examining presidential actions—with the possibility of a recall referendum. By uniting deliberative scrutiny with the power to remove the head of state, this approach offers an underexplored complement to recent anti-oligarchic institutional innovations based on sortition.