Abstract

In this paper I argue for a dual conception of democratic legitimacy. According to this conception, political decisions and actions must have specific procedural and substantive features to be democratically legitimate. The aim of the paper is both to seek to specify the nature of these features, and to clarify how they can be articulated together. I show that the procedural and substantive components of democratic outcomes correspond to two sets of equally necessary, but not individually sufficient, conditions for democratic legitimacy. I then proceed to argue that respect for procedural requirements should nevertheless be granted a certain priority in the evaluation of democratic legitimacy.