Il silenzio non esiste

This paper probes how constitutional courts address legislative silence, using a John Cage inspired analogy: as silence structures music, it also generates legal effects. Distinguishing absolute vs. relative and determinate vs. indeterminate omissions, it surveys three judicial responses – caducatory (demolitory), collaborative (dialogic), and manipulative (integrative) – plus hybrids. Brief case studies (Italy’s additive rulings and endof-life decisions; Spain’s inconstitucionalidad sin nulidad; Germany’s compatibility declarations; Portuguese state liability; Río Negro’s staged remedy) illustrate varied payoffs and risks. The analysis concludes that weak legislative follow-through shifts norm-making toward courts, reframing separation of powers as a relational principle and reviving legitimacy debates in contemporary constitutionalism.