The silences that are present in a constitution, most especially, in a constitution that is in competition with political violence, are of equal relevance to the constitutional language and canon. Such silences may be intended to leave space where consensus could not be found, allowing the constitution to be open to future interpretation. They may also be accidental. Constitutional silences are, like aspiration in constitutions, tools to balance diversity. V Jackson suggests that silence can provide a remedy for holding off potential secessionist movements. The only alternative to silence may be to include an explicit constitutional right to self-determination. The narrative and identity of a constitution is shaped by the decision to include a reference to secession. To do so may be inviting the breakup of a state. However, it may also open up the constitutional narrative to the idea that the state is not necessarily permanent.