Lisbon Treaty and the Possibility of a European Network Demoi-cracy (original) (raw)
Related papers
International Centre for Democratic Transition Paper Series, 2015
The debate about whether democracy as the best available political regime at national level can and should be transferred to the supranational level as well becomes particularly relevant when applied to the framework of the ‘ever closer’ European Union. In this paper, I assess one of the profound contributions to this debate, that of Jürgen Habermas, from the perspective of a specific concept, that of constituent power. I ask (1) where does constituent power, that is, the power to create a (democratic) political community, lie in Habermas’ theory when applied to the EU level and (2) whether and how his proposals for the development of the EU advance the discourse on its political nature. I start with reviewing his general theory of the role of law in society to outline the main differences he views between a democratic community at a national and supranational level. Then, I look at his understanding of the EU where he argues in favour of a constitution making process by two subjects, ‘the citizens and the peoples of Europe.’ Despite the fact that a close look on Habermas’ scholarship in the last fifteen years shows a transformation from the ‘postnational’ to ‘transnational’, which is indicated by ‘milder’ criteria for an emergence of a European demos or drafting a European constitution, I argue that he offers a road towards a democratic EU which, with some ‘intermediate steps’ and political will, is applicable in the contemporary environment, characterised by integration via methods of ‘executive federalism’.
“EU Democracy and the Treaty of Lisbon,” Comparative European Politics 15 (2017): 705-728.
Comparative European Politics, 2017
This article provides a genealogy of the broad patterns of belief that contributed to the democratic reforms contained in the Treaty of Lisbon. Based on an analysis of European Union documents, the article draws three primary conclusions. First, EU democracy is a composite of concepts. This is due to the fact that the institutions which had primary responsibility for negotiating treaty changes – the European Council, the European Parliament and the European Commission – drew on distinct " governance traditions " in formulating their reform proposals. Second, our understanding of which changes introduced by the Lisbon Treaty were intended to be democracy-enhancing should be significantly broadened. This becomes evident once it is understood how certain reforms are connected to the three institutions' wider webs of belief. Third, two factors explain continuing limitations on the democratic character of the Union: conflicts over what democracy should mean in the context of the EU and the purpose or motivation behind the Lisbon Treaty reforms, what is labeled here a " system maintenance " view of democracy. In addition to these substantive contributions to the study of the EU and democracy, the article also outlines the main analytical components of a genealogical approach. * If you would like a copy of this article, please email me at phillips[at]lycoming.edu.
Introduction: multilevel democracy in the European Union and the innovations of the Lisbon Treaty
Comparative European Politics, 2018
The Lisbon Treaty contained three institutional innovations that were designed to make the European Union (EU) more democratic: the Ordinary Legislative Procedure (OLP), the Early Warning Mechanism (EWM) for national parliaments, and the European Citizens' Initiative (ECI). This short article sets the stage for a symposium that assesses whether the three mechanisms have indeed contributed to the EU's democratization. It situates OLP, EWM, and ECI in the EU's system of multilevel democracy and raises the question of whether the mechanisms address the institutional and societal factors that cause the EU's democratic deficit.
Democracy in the European Union and the Treaty of Lisbon
Alternatives: Turkish Journal of International Relations, 2009
Democracy, one of the basic values of Western politics, has undergone a comprehensive development process still in progress during the course of European integration. Although at the initial phase of the integration, even no hint of democracy was on the fore, it has become one of the most discussed subjects in the Union. With the recent development of the Lisbon Treaty, the question of democratic legitimacy, transparency and efficiency of the EU was put at the center. Thus, it has been given much more attention and its credentials have been improved day by day in the EU. However, democracy, which is a very comprehensive subject incorporating several issues related to the EU, such as the principles of the EU, the institutional structure, legislative procedures, fundamental rights and the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, despite all this improvement trend in force, is still not sufficient. In this context, in which there still exists democratic deficit in the EU, after a brief historical background of the issue, the Lisbon Treaty is analyzed in terms of the novelties, advances it brought to democracy in the EU basically in two parts, namely the democratic principles, and the institutional and functional aspects of European democracy in this study. In the light of this analysis, it is aimed to figure out the advantages and limits of the improvement trend in European democracy, which would open the way for further developments in this issue.
2009
To address the uncertainties surrounding the Treaty of Lisbon, this book examines several issues from various angles. Regardless of the results of the second referendum in Ireland and the pending ratifications in Poland, the Czech Republic and Germany, the European Union (EU) will not be the same after the Lisbon Treaty. If it comes into effect, Europeans will enter into a new stage in the deepening of the integration process; if it is rejected, the first decade of the 21st Century will represent a period of institutional stagnation in Europe's integration. Nonetheless, the chapters in this book share the consensus that, despite its limitations, the Lisbon Treaty will make the EU decision making process more efficient, enhance regional democracy and strengthenits international voice.
The Lisbon Treaty and National Constitutions Europeanisation and Democratic Implications
The European Union has affe cted national constitutions. To some extent, this implies a cosmopolitan turn in their content whilst, in parallel, national constitutions have been adopted to protect their core from the expansive tendency of European integration. The Europeanisation of national constitutions supplements and completes the unfinished process of constitutionalisation of the EU. The two processes can be seen as two sides of the samecoin. This report explores how this has happened and to what extent the model of a constitutional EU is emerging. It does so by investigating several topics, such as the Charter of Fundamental Rights, the processes for national ratification of EU Treaties, and the constitutional discourses in the media.
Towards a union of citizens and states: negotiating transnational democracy in Europe
When referring to constitution-making, scholars and the media have compared the European Union (EU) at the beginning 21 st century to the early modern United States, and have pointed to analogies between the Convention in Brussels and the Convention of Philadelphia. 1 Such historical parallels are suggestive but overlook decisive differences between the tasks of the "Convention on the Future of Europe" that submitted the "Draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe" to the European Council in Thessalonica on June 20 th , 2003, and those of Madison, Franklin and the other convention members who drafted the constitution of the American Federation in summer 1787. The European experience differs from that of the U.S. notably, not only because of its much larger scale, the greater cultural and linguistic diversity of its 25 member states and 450 million inhabitants, or the unlikeliness of a bloody civil war for imposing federal unity. More importantly, in trying to mould the "contradictory sovereignties of the parts... into a whole", the challenge of democratic legitimacy plays a pivotal role in Europe. 2 The U.S. constituent act originated in a pre-democratic century and was therefore flawed by numerous democratic shortcomings. 3 The EU Convention, by contrast, was explicitly mandated by the heads of states and governments to improve the efficiency and legitimacy of European decision-making by resolving the democratic deficit in the enlarged Union. Looking back on the 15 months of constitutional debates, the chairman of the Convention, Valerie Giscard d'Estaing, found hardly any other topic on which the positions diverged as much as in relation to democratic legitimacy. 4 Vice chairman Giuliano Amato framed the task of building a consensus on this issue in a historical perspective: While the 19th and 20th centuries had witnessed the birth of democracy in Europe and its expansion among nation states, he saw the challenge of the 21st century in not only thinking a European transnational democracy, but in constructing it. 5 Did the Treaty on a Constitution for Europe that was ultimately signed by the heads of state and government in Rome on October 29, 2004, signal that the framers of the European Constitution had successfully coped with this challenge of democracy beyond the nation state?