|
Initiative for Europe
– into new democratic territory
Initiative & Referendum Institute Europe
Working Paper
October 2004
IRI working paper on the options and limits of Art. 47.4 in
the EU Constitution - the European Citizens’ Initiative process.
By Bruno Kaufmann & Theo Schiller
Imprint
Initiative for Europe – into new democratic territory
IRI working paper on the options and limits of Art. 47.4 in the EU Constitution
– the European Citizens’ Initiative process.
Written and edited by: Bruno Kaufmann & Theo
Schiller
Proof-reading: Paul Carline and Alkuin Kölliker
Produced by: Roman Huber (Democracy International)
About the authors: Bruno Kaufmann (1965) President of the Initiative &
Referendum Institute, Europe and Radio Broadcast Correspondent. MA in Social
Sciences (Peace and Development Research, Gothenburg University).
Kaufmann@iri-europe.org
Theo Schiller (1942) Director at the Research Center for Direct Democracy at
Marburg University and Professor in Political Science. PhD (Bonn University).
schiller@staff.uni-marburg.de
This working paper has been produced in cooperation with
Democracy International
1. Introduction
The new Constitution for Europe, with its Art. 47.4, provides
a new tool for democratic participation in European politics - the European
Citizens’ Initiative:
"A significant number of citizens, no less than one
million, coming from a significant number of Member States, may take the
initiative of inviting the Commission within the framework of its power, to
submit an appropriate proposal on matters where citizens consider that a legal
act of the Union is required for the purpose of implementing this Constitution.
A European law shall determine the provisions for the specific procedures and
conditions required for such a citizens’ initiative, including the minimum
number of Member States from which they must come."
This seems to be a small step, but it can be the starting
point for an important democratic innovation in Europe.
Firstly, the European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI) responds to
the notorious criticism of the ‘democratic deficit’ originating from the
mostly indirect forms of legitimation in a "secondary democracy".
Secondly, the ECI is not an isolated element in the Constitution of Europe but
is embedded in a new approach to democracy set out in Title VI, arts. 45-52 CE.
The Union is founded on the basic values of humanity, freedom, democracy,
equality, the rule of law and guaranteed human rights (Art. 2), elaborated in
the Charter of Basic Rights, which has been incorporated into the Constitution
as Part II. Thus, the Constitution provides an important new context for
democratic participation in EU politics.
The ECI represents the first form of direct democratic
participation in the European political system.
How does it fit into the overall democratic framework of democracy in the Union?
What can be its specific contribution to democratic development in Europe?
Can the European Citizens’ Initiative support the Europeanisation of politics?
The European Constitution obviously seeks to give a new start to democracy in
Europe.
- It postulates the principle of equality and of
representative government and gives the same rank to representative
democracy as to participatory democracy (art. 47).
All citizens are given the right to participate in the democratic life of
the Union (art. 46.3).
Under the principle of participatory democracy all EU institutions are
obliged to offer to citizens and representative associations opportunities
to publicly advocate and exchange their political opinions (art. I-47.1), to
engage in an open and transparent dialogue with associations and civil
society (art. I 47.2) and to conduct public hearings with affected groups
(art. I-47.3); this is supported by the principle and innovative rules of
transparency for the behaviour of EU institutions).
- It is in this context that the Constitution provides for
the new instrument of the European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI) ,which
allows at least one million citizens in a "significant" number of
member states to petition the European Commission to present proposals on
matters deemed necessary for implementation of the Constitution (art.
47.4.).
These democracy clauses (title VI) amount to a drive towards
providing new channels of participation to active citizens in order to overcome
the limitations of indirect forms of democracy and, thus, open a perspective for
"primary" democracy in Europe.
The European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI) is one of the new elements in the EU
democratic constitution, bringing in a procedure of direct democracy, which, in
general, has two main features: (1) the procedure is focussed on specific policy
issues, and (2) it allows citizens (in a referendum) to act directly as
political decision-makers. Whereas the second element is not included in the ECI
, the direct policy focus is crucial.
The Union’s secondary democracy is lacking a consolidated
and lively political public and, therefore, a basis for the transparency of
European affairs. This is exactly where the qualities of direct democracy can be
brought to bear:
- The focus on issues relating to "normal" European
politics contributes to the public visibility of European matters and allows
transnational public debate and a European public to develop.
- Participation, visibility and debates can and must cross
borders and involve citizens in many member states of the Union and thus
contribute to the "Europeanisation" of political decisionmaking.
- The Initiative as an instrument of direct democracy opens
up opportunities for citizens to participate in European agenda-setting and
can also serve as a means for the popular control of policy.
Issue-focused activities will also enrich electoral processes,
make European institutions generally more responsive and attract the active
involvement of European citizens.
Thus, although the ECI – as a kind of "agenda initiative" - seems to
be rather limited, it onetheless has the two key features of an issue-centred
and pan-European procedure.
Bruno Kaufmann, Theo Schiller
Amsterdam, Marburg and Brussels
October 11, 2004
2. The instrument
2.1. The Initiative device
Within the framework of modern democracy, the citizens’
initiative right plays an increasingly important role. In addition to their
voting rights in elections (of parties and/or individuals) and referendum votes
(on issues), the right of initiative gives people the possibility of becoming
political agenda-setters.
Popular initiative rights were developed in the late nineteenth and early
twentieth centuries in federal countries such as Switzerland, the United States
and Australia. They were introduced as a complement to the already existing
tools of elections and referendum votes. Initiative rights were also introduced
as an innovative and counter-balancing element to the more majoritarian
referendum vote device. While in referendum votes majorities must prevail,
initiative rights enable minorities to become part of a polity.
The instrument of the initiative plays a very specific role in the political
process: instead of the promise of a possible majority, initiatives gives
societal groups the option of offering innovations and reforms to the parliament
or even the whole electorate. 21 European countries have some form of initiative
process today:
Austria, Britain, Germany, Finland, France, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein,
Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Sweden, Switzerland, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain,
Portugal, Hungary, Macedonia, Netherlands, Norway
Black – Rather well developed Citizen Initiative ("Full
Initiative")
Dark – Somewhat developed Citizen Initiative ("Agenda Initiative")
Grey – Citizen Initiative available on local level only
White – Countries without Citizen Initiative
As a pure decision-making instrument, the initiative process is
not a very efficient tool. Its main strength derives from the communication
process of gathering signatures and the establishment of a value-added quality
in the dialogue between citizens and officials. It is the kind of instrument
which the citizens of the EU have been demanding for a considerable period of
time.
2.2. Art. 47.4
Art. 47.4 of the EU constitution finally establishes the first
element of modern direct democracy within the EU. The governments of Italy and
Austria had already proposed the creation of a citizens’ initiative right in
1996, during the Amsterdam negotiations. However, at that time most governments
had not developed the necessary understanding for the Austro-Italian proposal.
In the EU Convention things went better: after a series of different proposals
for an initiative right had been presented, 70 Convention members were finally
able to agree on a proposal to include the principle of the Citizens’
Initiative Right in the draft Constitution.
As the European Union has its own unique political system, the new citizens’
right has to meet certain special requirements:
- the European Citizens’ Initiative is the equivalent
to the European Parliament’s possibility of proposing new laws etc. to the
EU Commission.
- Art. 47.4. does not exclude any specific policy areas from
the initiative right.
- the European Citizens’ initiative does not – unlike the
initiative rights in e.g. Slovenia or Slovakia – trigger a referendum
process.
- there is a requirement that the signatures supporting the
initiative must come from a "significant number of states".
Art. 47.4. is embedded in a new democratic approach within the
EU (Art. 46 and 47), granting the citizens the right to participate in the
decision-making process. However, the constitutional article leaves the specific
procedures and conditions required for such a citizens´ initiative to a
European law. It will be this law-making process which will determine the
success of the new European Citizens’ Initiative right.
2.3. What do we want to achieve?
It is obvious that the different players within the European
polity have different aims in respect of the implementation of Art. 47.4 in a
European law. Whereas the introduction of such an instrument back in 1996 was
still seen as unnecessary by most heads of Government, a majority of the
Convention understood the usefulness of creating the first direct policy-making
link between the citizens and the European institutions – one which does not
take a detour through the member states’ polities. Additionally, it can be
said that the member states did not oppose this during the inter-governmental
conference.
The need for more democracy in the EU is notorious, but not surprising. For a
long time, the European integration process functioned on the basis of
traditional international treaties, negotiated and agreed on by states and
governments. With the end of the Cold War and agreement to the Maastricht Treaty
on the foundation of a "political Union", the bar was significantly
raised.
"Europe must become more democratic or Europe will disappear", stated
the former President of the EU Commission, Jacques Delors in 1992, after the
Danish ‘No’ to the Maastricht Treaty. In the subsequent debates it became
obvious that the European Union was in need of: more issue-related discussion;
greater legitimacy; a narrowing gap between politicians and citizens; stronger
integration of minorities; more identification and communication – and all of
that at a trans-national, European level.
2.4. How can the European Citizens’
Initiative contribute to this?
The experience with direct democratic devices in the member
states shows that the initiative tool has the potential to improve the overall
democratic culture. Much depends, however, on the specific design of the
initiative instrument, as it must be user-friendly in order to unfold its
potential.
A simple test is to look at the frequency of the use of initiative tools in
regions and countries.
Whereas the "abrogative" initiative in Italy has been used more than
50 times in 20 years, the Latvian citizens’ initiative has been tried only
five times in ten years. There are two main reasons for this: in Italy, only 2%
of the electorate have to sign a valid initiative; in Latvia the threshold is
10%. In addition, the Latvian constitution excludes many issues from the
initiative process, whereas most Italian laws can be contested by the people.
The first aim with the European Law on Art. 47.4. must be to create a
user-friendly procedure, which can promote issue-related debates across Europe,
improve the dialogue between citizens and politicians and become instrumental in
integrating minorities into the EU polity. For this reason, binding and
encouraging elements must be incorporated into the European Citizens’
Initiative Law. A preliminary checklist of elements to be considered may help us
in preparing the further work.
2.5. The European Citizens’ Initiative
Checklist
2.5.1. Thresholds and time limits
The first qualifying hurdle is already written down in Art.
47.4. "No less than one million citizens".
This is a sizeable, but manageable, number of signatures and should not be
increased. The second threshold element - "a significant number of Member
States" - is more controversial, as there are arguments both for keeping
the number of member states as small as possible – making initiatives easier
– and for extending it to a large number of states – the European dimension.
There are no time limits written into Art. 47.4. Experience shows that a
significant amount of time is needed to develop a dialogue between the group
launching an initiative and the wider society. Public dialogue is of value in
itself. For this reason, the time limit should not be shorter than one year. It
is possible to argue that there is no need for a time limit at all, since the
initiatives are just an advisory, agenda-setting tool.
This would, however, weaken the motivation to concentrate on and complete the
signature gathering process. A final deadline should, therefore, be considered.
Finally, there should be firm time limits for the subsequent processing of the
subject of the Initiative by the EU institutions.
2.5.2. Issues to be targeted by the Citizens’ Initiative
This may be another issue in the upcoming debate as Art. 47.4.
states that initiatives can be launched "for the purpose of implementing
this Constitution". There should be no further restrictions as to the
subjects which can be proposed by an Initiative.
The big challenge will, however, be the question: in what legal form will the
future Citizens’ Initiatives be launched? Will they be presented in a general
form, giving the Commission the freedom to "translate" the proposition
into a law proposal or a constitutional amendment; or in a more formulated way,
already setting out the specific text of a new law ?
2.5.3. Developing the EU citizenship
Up to now, Union citizenship was merely an indirect concept.
With the new Treaty /Constitution, the citizens of Europe will potentially gain
new strength, as the Charter of Fundamental Rights becomes part of the common
legal foundation. The European Citizens’ Initiative for the very first time
opens the door to direct involvement of the citizens in the EU decision-making
process.
The eligibility issue for the initiative right will have to be dealt with in the
same way as the voting right for EU elections, as this may strengthen the de
facto legitimacy of the instrument within the political system.
However, in order to encourage and enhance the chances of the citizens using the
new tool, a wide range of "official assistance" has to be considered,
beginning with non-partisan advice in drafting an initiative text, through
offering services to initiative groups in their signaturegathering, to a
possible reimbursement for each signature gathered. A final question not to be
forgotten is the legal form of initiative committees, their rights (e.g.
withdrawal of an initiative) and duties (e.g. transparency, accountability).
2.2.4. The role of the EU institutions
As the European Citizens’ Initiatives will be directed to
the EU institutions, member states should not interfere or deal with the process
at all. This will imply that EU representations in the member states can be
asked by citizens for formal advice, otherwise some assistance from national
offices would be needed. However, as one goal of the new instrument is to
improve the dialogue between citizens and politicians, a well-defined role for
the EU Commission, the Parliament and the Council should be found. One option is
for the EU Commission, having received a valid initiative, to forward the matter
to the Parliament for discussions and recommendations, before drafting a new law
or constitutional amendment, which will finally be part of the formal EU
decision making process.
***
The European Citizens’ Initiative Right provides the EU and its peoples with
an enormous potential for democratic progress – its success will now depend on
the amount and quality of the care, time and resources which all the players in
the implementation process are prepared to contribute.
3. Implementation
3.1. Mapping the interests
It is no surprise that Articles 46 and 47 have aroused a great
deal of interest within civil society in Europe, and especially within the NGO
community. Many citizens’ groups were involved in promoting the introduction
of Art. 47.4. already during the Convention’s work. Subsequently, many NGOs
have started to discuss the future opportunities linked to the European
Citizens’ Initiative. Three different groups can be identified:
- Large and well-established pan-European organizations, such
as the Trade Unions.
- Brussels-based umbrella organizations covering and
reporting on EU developments, such as Act4Europe or ECAS.
- Smaller democracy networks and groups, both at the European
level and based within member states.
Most of these groups of NGOs see the work with the European
Citizens’ Initiative as a long-term project and possibly as only a first step
on the way to more binding direct democratic instruments at the EU level.
However, there are NGOs which are sceptical about the prospects for the ECI,
such as the European Citizen Action Service (ECAS). In a draft paper on the ECI,
ECAS argues that "there is some danger of citizen’s initiative being seen
as the solution to the problem of the democratic deficit (...) infrequently used
and for this reason should not be over-regulated or give rise to exaggerated
expectations or fears".
Whereas the future "producers" of initiatives have a natural interest
in a well-designed and user-friendly procedure, the perspective of the
"receivers" and "processors" of these initiatives, e.g. the
EU Commission, the European Parliament, the political parties and the media, is
less obvious and has still to be mapped carefully.
However, groups of the EP and the members of the Commission Task Force in charge
have started to work onthe promising and challenging nature of Art. 47.4. and to
explore the implementation process. The same is true for a limited number of
think-tanks or activist networks.
Interestingly, we have not yet seen any outspoken opponents of the European
Citizens’ Initiative right.
3.2. Gathering the expertise and enabling a consultation
As the new EU Commission is in process of taking over within a
month, preparations for the commencement of the implementation of Art. 47.4 have
been and will continue to be made. This draft working paper by IRI Europe is
part of the preparation. All interested players should now be part of the
process of gathering the required expertise on the initiative tool, as well as
being involved in a consultation process. This will support the work of the
officials at the EU Commission to prepare and design the formal implementation
process.
Together with several MEPs and Democracy International, the Initiative &
Referendum Institute invited all interested players to an international seminar
on October 11th 2004 at the European Parliament. At this event, the major
political interest in getting an efficiently and effectivelyoperating initiative
right was underlined, and a first list of important questions was discussed.
On the fringe of this event, an independent expert working group on the
Initiative Right, as well as a pan-European network on the Initiative Right will
start their activities. Whereas the expert group will develop proposals and
recommendations for the design of the EU Law on the Initiative right, the goal
of the Network is to educate and lobby on the potential of the new instrument
across Europe.
3.3 Providing Information
For the process of developing the implementation law a broad
background of information on the entire field of the right and practice of the
initiative should be made available. Participants should have the opportunity of
access to a similar level of information on regulations and practical use of the
initiative in the various European member states (and beyond). Such a broad
information base will support participants in identifying the most relevant
issues of implementation and reaching consensus on evaluating the qualities of
designs and regulations of the instruments.
Information should cover the agenda initiative as well as the full initiative
leading to a referendum ballot in order to have a complete picture of popular
activities relevant to this field of direct democracy.
For the relevant countries there should be available:
- Design and administrative regulations of the existing types
of initiative (see example in Appendix)
- The agenda initiative (where available) in the
institutional context of various instruments of direct democracy
- Practice reports on countries with some use of initiative
rights (including aspects of political participation in the political
culture).
To collect and provide this information in some areas more
research will be needed.
IRI Europe will be ready to contribute to the extension of such an information
base and to cooperate with all participants who want to support this.
Particularly, existing links with academic research institutions and think-tanks
will be used for this aim.
Information on these subjects can be made available in different forms:
- Printed publications and online databases
- Expert meetings and seminars.
- Information should also be distributed via the media
in order to interest more people and the public in the subject and the
implementation process.
4. Resources
4.1. Citizens Initiative in selected European countries
| Country |
Population Mio. |
Agenda Initiative
Signatures |
% |
Full Initiative Signatures |
% |
| Austria |
8.1 |
100.000 |
1.23 |
– – |
|
| Italy |
57.6 |
50.000 |
0.08 |
referendum abrogativo
500.000
(or 5 reg. councils) |
0.80 |
| Latvia |
2.3 |
(230.000) |
10.0 |
|
|
| Poland |
38.6 |
100.000 |
0.25 |
– |
|
| Slovakia |
5.3 |
350.000 |
6.6 |
(350.000) |
|
| Spain |
39.4 |
500.000 |
1.26 |
– – |
|
| EU |
480 |
1 Mio. |
.20 |
– – |
|
Source: Transnational Democracy in the Making,
IRI Europe Handbook 2004
4.2. Direct Democracy Glossary
of Terms
-
Abrogative referendum
A vote of the electorate which may decide to either retain or repeal a law
or decree that has been agreed and promulgated by the legislature and
already implemented.
-
Ad hoc referendum
A vote of the electorate required to be called by a person, organ or group
within the executive or the legislature, for example by the president, or by
the majority or minority within the legislature
-
Agenda initiative
A direct democracy instrument which enables a number of citizens to submit a
proposal which must be considered by the legislature but is not put to a
vote of the electorate
-
Alternative proposal
A synonym for counter-proposal
-
Approval quorum
A requirement for passing a vote of the electorate which takes the form of a
minimum number or percentage of the entire electorate whose support is
necessary for a proposal to be passed.
-
Ballot paper
Piece of paper or electronic equivalent on which citizens who participate in
a vote of the electorate under a direct democracy instrument mark or
indicate their choice.
-
Ballot text
Text which appears on the ballot paper for a vote of the electorate under a
direct democracy instrument, typically in the form of a question or a series
of options. For a referendum it may typically be a specified question text,
or a question seeking agreement or rejection of a text; for an initiative, a
question asking for agreement or rejection of a proposal identified by the
title of the citizens’ initiative; for a recall, a question asking for
agreement or rejection of the early termination in office of a specified
office holder
-
Binding
Description of a vote of the electorate where, if a proposal passes, the
government or appropriate authority is compelled to implement it
-
Citizens’ initiative
A direct democracy instrument that allows a certain number of citizens to
initiate a vote of the electorate on a proposal outlined by those citizens.
The proposal may for example amend the constitution, or adopt, repeal or
amend an existing law
-
Citizens’ demand
A direct democracy instrument that allows a certain number of citizens to
initiate an abrogative or rejective referendum on an existing law or a law
just passed by the legislature
-
Constitutionality
The quality of being in accordance with and not contradictory to the
constitution of a country
-
Consultative referendum
A vote of the electorate the outcome of which is in legal terms only
advisory upon a government or appropriate authority. (It may, however, be
politically difficult for a government or authority to evade its outcome.)
-
Counterproposal
A proposal agreed by the legislature to be presented to a vote of the
electorate as an alternative to the proposal contained in a citizens’
initiative
-
Direct democracy instrument
Instrument which gives citizens the right to be directly involved in the
political decision making process. It may take one of the following forms:
- Citizens voting on a public policy proposal originated elsewhere
(referendum);
- Citizens setting the agenda by originating a public policy proposal
themselves (initiative);
-
Double majority
Requirement for a proposal to pass which includes both a majority of the
overall total votes cast and a majority of the votes in at least a specified
proportion of defined lower level electoral areas
-
Elected
Chosen to a public office through an election
-
Election
Institutionalised procedures whereby the electorate choose by ballot persons
(either by name or through political parties or groupings) to occupy
specific offices or posts
-
Elector
A person who is qualified and registered to vote in an election or in a vote
of the electorate under a direct democracy instrument
-
Electorate
The total number of electors
-
Facultative referendum
synonym for optional referendum
-
Initiative
A procedure which allows a certain number of citizens to submit a proposal
to be dealt with by the legislature. One form (citizens’ initiative) leads
to a vote of the electorate, a second (agenda initiative) to the
consideration of the proposal by the legislature.
-
Initial proposal
The first text deposited by the proponents of a referendum, initiative or
recall
-
Legislature
The constitutional organ that is empowered to make law through the formal
enactment of legislation
-
Legality
The quality of being in accordance with and not in conflict with the laws of
a country or with international law
-
Legality check
The scrutiny by a public authority of the constitutionality and legality of
a proposal
-
Mandatory referendum
A vote of the electorate which is called automatically under circumstances
defined in the constitution or in legislation.
-
Obligatory referendum
A synonym for mandatory referendum
-
Optional referendum
A vote of the electorate which is called by a formal demand, which may
emanate from the executive, from a number of members of the legislature,
from a number of citizens or from some other defined agent
-
Pass
A direct democracy vote passes when it is valid and the prescribed majority
requirements for approval of the proposal within it are met
-
Popular consultation
A synonym for referendum vote
-
Proponents
The persons who first sign and deposit an initiative process, and are
registered as such
-
Proposal
The complete text of a referendum orinitiative
-
Publication
The act of making a proposal for an initiative public by the appropriate
authority after it has been registered and checked for compliance with the
substantive and formal requirements of registration
-
Qualification for the ballot
The act of declaration by the appropriate authority that verification of a
citizens’ demand or a citizens’ initiative has been completed and
additionally in the case of a citizens’ initiative that the legislature
has taken all steps to submit any desired counterproposal
-
Qualified majority
A majority requirement demanding that for a proposal to be passed, it must
receive a proportion of the vote in excess of 50% plus 1 – for example 2/3
or 3/4
-
Quorum
The minimum level of support required for a vote of the electorate to pass a
proposal: see approval quorum and turnout quorum
-
Recall
An instrument that allows a specified number of citizens to demand a vote of
the electorate on whether an elected holder of public office should be
removed from that office before the end of his/her term of office
-
Referendum
A direct democracy instrument consisting of a vote of the electorate on an
issue of public policy such as a constitutional amendment or a bill. A
referendum may be either mandatory or optional. The consequences of the vote
may be either binding or consultative
-
Referendum question
A synonym for ballot text: the question put on the ballot paper in a vote of
the electorate under a direct democracy instrument
-
Registration of a citizens’ initiative
The act of depositing an initiative for publication and collection of
signatures, whereby the legal process of the initiative is officially
started
-
Registered committee
The proponents of a referendum, initiative or recall when they are
officially registered in the form of a committee
-
Rejective referendum
A vote of the electorate which may either retain or repeal a law or decree
that has been agreed by the legislature but has not yet come into force.
-
Repealing vote
A synonym for an abrogative vote
-
Signature
The signature by a citizen in formal support of a proposal for a referendum,
initiative or recall
-
Simple majority
A majority requirement of more than half of the total number of valid votes
cast
-
Submission
The act of depositing collected signatures with the proper authority in a
citizens’ initiative or citizens’ demand process
-
Title
The formal name given to the proposal in a citizens’ initiative or
citizens’ demand
-
Turnout quorum
A specified minimum turnout required for a vote of the electorate to pass a
proposal
-
Valid
1. Of a vote of the electorate, that any necessary quorum is achieved 2. Of
a signature or vote, that it is correctly in accordance with procedures and
regulations
-
Validity check
The scrutiny of a submission by a public authority for conformity with
procedures and regulations
-
Verification
The declaration of acceptance by the proper authority that the submission
contains at least the required number of valid signatures and complies with
the law, regulations and procedural rules
-
Vote of the electorate
An electoral event under a direct democracy instrument in which the
electorate expresses choice through casting a ballot
-
Voter
An elector who casts a ballot at an election or a vote of the electorate
under a direct democracy instrument
Note: This glossary of terms has been developed in cooperation
with International IDEA. www.idea.int/newsletters/2004/Sep_Oct04/direct_democracy.htm
4.3. Contacts
4.4. Literature
-
Cuesta, Victor (2002): La iniciativa popular
en el derecho constitutional europeo comparado, LLM thesis, Florence:
European University Institute
-
Kaufmann, Bruno (2004): The Initiative &
Referendum Monitor 2004/2005. IRI Europe Toolkit to Free and Fair
Referendums and Citizens’ Initiative. London (The Creative Element).
-
Kaufmann, Bruno (2004): Direct Democracy in
Switzerland. DVD with CD-Rom part about the Swiss experience of direct
democracy. Bern (Swissinfo).
-
Kaufmann, Bruno/Waters, M. Dane (2004):
Direct Democracy in Europe. A comprehensive reference guide to the
Initiative and Referendum Process in Europe. Durham (Carolina Academic
Press)
-
Kaufmann, Bruno/Horton, Ed (2004): Exploring
Democracy. A secondary school educational resource for citizenship in the
UK. London (Rapport Group).
-
Kaufmann, Bruno/Filliez, Fabrice (2004): The
European Constitution – Bringing in the People. The options and limits of
direct democracy in the European integration process.
-
Brussels (IRI Europe) Kaufmann, Bruno/Büchi,
Rolf/Braun, Nadja/Carline, Paul (forthcoming 2005): IRI Guidebook to Direct
Democracy (in Switzerland and Beyond). Amsterdam (IRI Europe).
-
Schiller, Theo (2002): Direkte Demokratie.
Eine Einführung, Frankfurt a. M./New York (Campus)
-
Schiller, Theo/Mittendorf, Volker (2002):
Direkte Demokratie - Forschung und Perspektiven, Wiesbaden (Westdeutscher
Verlag)
-
Schiller, Theo (forthcoming 2004):
"Secondary Democracy" in the European Union and the role of direct
democracy (article).
4.5. The Initiative & Referendum Institute
Europe
The Initiative & Referendum Institute, Europe
(IRI Europe) was founded in 2001. IRI Europe‘s mission is to develop insights
into the theory and practice of I&R among politicians, the media, NGOs,
academics and the public throughout Europe.
IRI Europe is an independent, non-partisan and
non profit-making organisation.
The following projects and cooperations have been
concluded or are ongoing:
4.5.1. Direct Democracy in Europe – the
Reference Guide
-
Since 1989 almost all new European
constitutions have seen the inclusion of some form of initiative and
referendum process – many existing constitutional laws have been amended
with extended popular rights. Practical experience with direct democracy has
grown dramatically, with the number of nationwide referendums having more
than doubled since 1989.
-
In cooperation with leading academics and
officials of electoral management bodies, IRI Europe has put together the
first comprehensive reference guide to the initiative and referendum process
in Europe. The book, published in 2004 at Carolina Academic Press (ISBN
0-89089-262-8), includes a list of all the more than 1300 nationwide
referendum votes worldwide since 1789 and has been produced in close
cooperation with our sister institute in North America.
4.5.2. The European
Initiative & Referendum Challenge – Transnational Democracy in the Making
Between February 2002 and July 2003, a 105-
member assembly, called the Convention on the Future of Europe, drafted the EU
Constitution.
Formally still a treaty between the EU member states, this new basic law of the
European Union will establish the world’s first transnational constitution.
IRI Europe prepared and assisted the EU Convention with a series of
international conferences and publications. From Day 1 of the Convention IRI
Europe convened an informal working group on elements of direct democracy and
finally – in cooperation with many partners – facilitated the drafting of
Art. 46.4. in the new EU constitution, establishing a European Citizens’
Initiative as a principle and thus contributing to one of the most innovative
elements in the new constitution.
4.5.3. The IRI Europe
Initiative & Referendum Monitor
The new dynamics around the growing use of the
initiative & referendum process are strongly linked to the European
integration process.
Since 1972, more than 40 nationwide referendum
votes in 23 countries have been held on this issue alone. As a consequence, the
development of issue-oriented decision-making tools has been extended to
national as well as local issues.
With the goal of improving and ensuring the
quality of direct-democratic decision-making, the Institute started in 2003 to
monitor the EU accession referendums in ten countries. A team of experts
developed a first list of basic criteria for free and fair referendums and
discussed these at Europe-wide seminars before assessing the referendum
processes in the accession countries and publishing a first I&R Monitor
Report in spring 2004.
4.5.4. IRI Guidebook to Direct Democracy –
in Switzerland and beyond
-
What effect does the use of direct-democratic
instruments have on societies and economies?
-
Why do some countries let the people decide
about many more things than others?
-
How does a Swiss citizen cope with the huge
number of political decisions she or he has to take each year?
There are many questions, fears and hopes linked
with the growing use of the initiative and referendum process. For this reason,
it is important to learn from experience – e.g. in Switzerland, the country
with the best-developed citizens’ decision-making machinery.
Many experts within the IRI Europe network have
practical experience of initiatives and referendums.
Some have their origins in Switzerland, where a citizen usually has to make
political decisions four times a year. With this background, the Institute has
started to develop educational tools and guidebooks on direct democracy – in
Switzerland and beyond. The idea is to produce materials in different forms and
for different audiences in order to improve the know-how about direct democracy
and discuss its options and limits.
4.5.5. Initiative for Europe – into new
democratic territory
The new Constitution for Europe, with its art.
47.4, provides a new tool for democratic participation in European politics: the
European Citizens’ Initiative. This seems to be a small step, but it can be
the starting point for an important democratic innovation in Europe. Firstly,
the European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI) is a response to the ‘democratic
deficit’ which has been widely criticised in Europe. Secondly, the ECI is not
an isolated element in the Constitution for Europe, but is embedded in a new
approach to democracy set out in Title VI.
However, Art. 47.4. only describes the basic principles of this new democratic
instrument – the exact details, including the number of countries from which
the signatures must be gathered and the range of issues which the initiative
right will cover, will be part of the upcoming pre-implementation process, which
will start after the signing of the new Treaty by the EU Heads of State and
Government on October 29 in Rome. IRI Europe is co-facilitating this
implementation process by organizing conferences, offering publications and
assisting all those involved and interested in making up their minds and
improving their know-how.
4.5.6. Democracy Journeys – IRI Study Trips
into I&R
Meeting people on site, observing developments as
they are happening, feeling the distinct flavour of direct democracy – such
experiences cannot be gained from books or websites or by attending an
international conference somewhere.
What’s needed is a "live" experience of democracy which inspires and
motivates to learn more about the democratisation of democracy in the 21st
century.
In 2004, IRI Europe started to offer tailor-made
study trips to interested people from politics, the business community,
academia, media and civil society. The goal of these "democracy
journeys" is two-fold. First, the members of the study group shall learn
more about the history, the practice, the options and limits of the initiative
& referendum process. Second, the people involved should become I&R
experts within their own political and organizational contexts with a specific
focus on good practice and good design of I&R devices.
4.5.6. The European Constitution – Bringing
in the people
Hundreds of millions of Europeans will get a say
on the new common constitution prepared by the Convention and fine-tuned by the
member state governments. By September 2004, ten countries had announced
referendums for 2005 and 2006; in many other member states the issue of holding
a referendum was under intense consideration at that time – making the EU
constitution referendum process one of the most important political processes
across Europe in the next few years.
As many of the EU member states which have
announced a referendum vote are little used to this form of direct-democratic
decision-making, the Initiative & Referendum Institute has developed tools
for preparing, assessing and evaluating such citizens’ decisions – helping
Europe to ‘bring in the people’.
4.5.7. Congestion Charging – The Democratic
Way
More and more cities are becoming congested with
traffic, but the authorities do not have the money to improve the
infrastructure. In many big European urban centres some hard thinking has begun
in an attempt to find 21st-century solutions to their traffic problems. One of
the most promising of these solutions is congestion charging, successfully
introduced not long ago in London and about to be tried out in Stockholm in the
near future. It is already clear, however, that the greatest challenge is not
the technology – but the democratic process.
In cooperation with the Swiss Transport
Association and partner organizations throughout Europe the Institute has begun
an assessment of the direct-democratic options in relation to Congestion
Charging schemes. A first report was presented at an international conference in
Berne in Spring 2004. In Stockholm and Edinburgh, where the next referendums on
the introduction of Congestion Charging are planned, IRI Europe is providing
advice and information. The goal of the project is to provide the know-how on
best practice for the use of direct democracy devices.
|
