In the aftermath of the end of the cold war, constitutional transitions in South Africa (1994), Bosnia (1995), Fiji (1997), Northern Ireland (1998) and Iraq (2005) aimed at ameliorating ethnic conflict, fostering resilient democracy and achieving political stability. This paper asks what these cases teach us about suitable constitutional arrangements for divided societies. The first part examines the debates between so-called ‘centripetalist’, ‘consociationalist’ and ‘integrationist’ political scientists, and the extent to which institutions adopted in the five case studies conform to these approaches. The second part considers three critical questions about the impact of constitutional design in deeply divided societies: who was responsible; who benefitted; and what were the long-term repercussions.