Direct democracy is defined as a set of procedures that allow voters to initiate and veto legislation. These procedures have often been conceptualized as populist-inspired institutions that are combined with representative and liberal institutions. Contrary to this view, this article analyzes how institutions work when direct democracy is placed at the core of political systems, i.e., when constitutions are revised directly by voters. It argues that this institutional setting reinforces the liberal properties of democracy, such as the separation of powers and the independence of checks and balances, and it is more protected from illiberal forms of democracy than are representative systems. Based on this analysis, direct democracies can be described as systems in which representatives of political groups and independent institutions negotiate to find a consensual way to implement legislation and, if they fail to reach agreement, the people vote directly.
