Andorra · 25th anniversary of the Constitution of Andorra

Until 1993, Andorra’s state order was based on medieval rights of rule, customary law and later institutional reforms. Its starting point was a series of treaties from the 13th century, the so-called Pareatges. They regulated the joint rule of the Bishop of Urgell and the Count of Foix over the Andorran valleys. The secular rights later passed to France; eventually, the French President assumed the role of the second Co-Prince.

Since the Late Middle Ages, the Consell General had represented the parishes and the population, but for a long time there was no written constitution with a clear separation of powers. In the 20th century, political rights were gradually expanded. A reform in 1981 also established an autonomous government, thereby separating governmental responsibilities more clearly from those of the parliament. Nevertheless, the powers of the Co-Princes, the Consell General and the government remained partly unclear. Nor was Andorra’s status under international law comprehensively regulated.

The constitutional reform emerged from negotiations between Andorran representatives and the two Co-Princes. It reorganised the traditional institutions without abolishing the Co-Princes. The Bishop of Urgell and the French President remained joint heads of state, but their powers were constitutionally defined and limited. State authority was vested in the Andorran people. At the same time, parliament, government and the judiciary were assigned clearly distinct responsibilities; a Constitutional Court oversees compliance with the Constitution.

The new order also facilitated Andorra’s independent presence abroad. In 1993, the country became a member of the United Nations, and the following year it joined the Council of Europe. This gave its status as a sovereign state a clearer foundation internationally.

The anniversary was a suitable occasion for a coin because the Constitution marks the transition from a historically evolved system of co-princely rule to a modern parliamentary order. The depiction of anonymous citizens rather than individual politicians refers to the collective nature of this constitutional process.