[rmnunez]

I do believe a constitution negotiated among all members would be preferable to one by some single luminary from just one, better to have more active particiation, for those subjected to the constitution to feel there is something of their aspirations and concerns in the product.

I also think constitutions are something to result from a natural need rather than some prerequisite for subsequent progress. Governments in the past have sometimes sought to lay some foundational keystone through constitution drafting, we see it in Iraq, as in Afghanistan and across the ex-Soviet satellites. Seems to me it would be wiser to work with the established rules until the need for change appeared, to correct and tinker with the receding document until, through amendments it is refashioned into what is sought from a new document at once. But that is with individual countries, we haven't seen this constitutionalizing process in the fusion of states or fashioning of 'suprastates', perhaps the diversity of multinational membership requires some sort of overarching consolidating document with a specified kickoff point.