ENG ELC 220 Lecture Notes - Lecture 10: Execution Unit, Bicameralism, Good Governance
14 Oct 2020
School
Department
Course
Professor
EU Politics
A8 Democracy and legitimacy in the EU
Problem statement
Democracy and legitimacy in the EU
Debate: Statement to support/oppose
“The changes introduced by the Lisbon Treaty were sufficient to ensure the democratic quality of the
European Union”.
Smismans, S. (2016). Democracy & Legitimacy in the European Union
Introduction
• Question of democracy in the EU challenging, as it is a supranational polity: less than a state
but more than an international organization.
• Distinction democracy and legitimacy
o Democracy = “Set of procedures guaranteeing the participation of the governed in the
political system” (p.340)
o Legitimacy = “Generalized degree of trust that the governed have towards the political
system” (p.340). Can result from:
▪ Sufficient involvement in decision-making even if decisions’ outcome is not
always what they desire (input legitimacy) → Democratic process
▪ Satisfaction with the policy outcomes produced by the political system
(output legitimacy) → Performance and efficiency
▪ Usually combination of both, but one emphasizes more than the other → For
the EU, policy outcomes > democratic process
From ‘permissive consensus’ to ‘democratic deficit’
• 1957, creation of European Economic Community (EEC), limited powers → Little concern for
democratic accountability of the EEC → Guaranteed by MS’ democracy
o Monnet method = Sector-by-sector / functional approach to Eu integration
▪ Strong European Commission, composed of independent Commissioners
representing the general interests of the Community. COM: exclusive right of
initiative + central role as executive body; Council of Ministers: final decision-
maker; EP indirectly elected + consultative powers
▪ Functional expertise (= involving actors with particular expertise in the fields
for which the EEC had been given competence) rather than democratic
participation
▪ “PERMISSIVE CONSENSUS” (Lindberg and Scheingold): Little popular interest
in technocratic project but diffuse support for European integration →
Legitimacy of EEC based on output, without concerns about input legitimacy
• Clearer definition the European legal order by the ECJ: Based on principles of supremacy and
direct effect + Increase number of policy areas where the Community acts → Functionalist
approach insufficient to legitimize the European project → End PERMISSIVE CONSENSUS &
rise DEMOCRATIC DEFICIT
o “DEMOCRATIC DEFICIT” (DD) = “Idea that the transfer of policy-making power from
the national to the EU has not been accompanied by sufficient democratic control at
the EU level” (p.340)
▪ At national level, European integration → European policy issues are debated
and decided by the government in the Council → Strengthening executives to
the detriment of parliaments
▪ At European level, COM is strongest + EP too weak to ensure democratic
accountability
o Solutions to DD:
▪ Supranational/Federal solution: Democratize European decision-making by
increasing parliamentary representation
▪ Intergovernmental solution: Give full democratic accountability to national
parliaments by limiting the transfer of powers to the EU, and inasmuch this
transfer took place enabling national parliaments to ensure the accountability
of their minister in the Council
• 1970s-80s: Increase EEC’s influence → Political decision-makers opted for the first solution,
namely the parliamentarization of the European level
o Measures to democratize the EU
▪ 1979: Direct elections to the EP → Increase direct democratic input at EU level
▪ Increase EP powers in budgetary and legislative processes → Eu now
resembled a bicameral parliamentary democracy in which legislative power
is shared by the EP and the Council, representing respectively the EU
population and it,s MS
o Difficulties to the democratization of the EU:
▪ EP’s control over the Commission limited
• Parliamentary model of democracy does not limit the parliament’s
role to that of a legislature, but expects it to have control over the
executive through the appointment of the government and/or use
of a vote of censure
• EP has the possibility to dismiss the Commission (Rome) but no real
power to appoint the new one (appointment power belongs to the
Council, from candidates proposed by MS, thus tending to reflect the
parliamentary majorities in power at nat level at the moment of
appointment) → European elections means Europeans’ opinions are
reflected in EP but not automatically in COM
▪ No European demos
• EU is a sui generis political system, best described as supranational
polity → No demos, ‘people’ with some common identity or shared
values → No common identity or just a common cultural basis (‘idea
of Europe’, shared values; though study shows Eu common identity
seems to emerge very slowly) → No general European will → No
majoritarian decisions
▪ No European public sphere in which citizens are informed on and take part in
political discussions
• No European media → Communication on EU issues is nationally
coloured and split into different languages
• Activities by European interest groups are invisible to the wider public
• European political parties are weak
• EP elections are ‘second-order’, with low and uneven turnout
Maastricht and the debate during the 1990s
• EU’s democratic deficit strongly debated during the 1990s
o EU parliamentary model remained the reference point to frame democracy in the EU
o Concept of ‘European citizenship’ was introduced
o Could encourage the development of a common European identity and partially
address the ‘no demos’ problem
• 1992 Maastricht Treaty
o Co-decision procedure → OLP → Strengthening EP’s legislative power
Document Summary
The changes introduced by the lisbon treaty were sufficient to ensure the democratic quality of the. Permissive consensus (lindberg and scheingold): little popular interest in technocratic project but diffuse support for european integration . Eu provides, they will identify more with the union: 2000 charter of fundamental rights of the eu, provides eu citizens with a source of identification. The assumption is that democratic decision-making is guaranteed by means of parliamentary input, while the neutral" implementation of the parliamentary mandate is guaranteed by government and administration. Is concerned with different stages of decision-making and not only about legislative process and ep power in legislative decision-making. Initial stage: com interacts with many actors when drafting proposals. Lisbon treaty strengthened the democratic character of delegated legislation. Legislative acts have now 2 options to delegate to the. Commission to take further action: delegated acts: for general provisions but not the most important ones, com can adopt delegated acts but ep and.
