There is an assumption that authority must derive from somewhere, namely democracy.
‘the functioning of the Union shall be founded on representative democracy’ (TEU Art 10)
Democratic Deficit:
When discussing the democratic deficit of the EU it is imperative to question whether the EU is made to be democratic and whether it should be made more democratic.
Some argue that the EU should be more democratic so that it can legitimately discharge its obligations, while others argue that the EU’s exercise of power in important areas is exactly because it is less democratic than member states.
Models of democracy are often instinctively linked to those found in nation states, hence why debate surrounding democratic deficit in the EU is so persistent.
EU as a Regulatory State:
Majone argues that the EU is a regulatory state intended to enable open markets. [1] Making the EU more democratic makes EU policies worse, since politicians are captured by private and public interests, not long-term regulatory work. By placing experts as the key decision makers surrounding regulatory standards, the EU produces better outcomes.
This argument is perhaps unsustainable today – the role of the EU is no longer simply regulatory, but involves political aspects too.
EU as an Exercise of State Power (‘Statists’) - Democracy:
While the EU is not a federal state, it is moving in a general direction towards acting like a nation state in the policies it enacts, so the democratic standards of individual states should apply to legitimise the role of the EU.
Benchmark: national democracy.
Commitment: electoral accountability – ‘throwing the scoundrels out’.
Representative politics: agenda setting capacity, deliberation and majoritarianism.
Participatory politics: citizens able to engage in exercising authority.
Generally, people who subscribe to this view believe that European Parliament elections should focus on the interests of European citizens and the Commission should be more accountable to the electorate. Furthermore, the EU lacks a public sphere element, where citizens can discuss current issues. This is a deliberate choice in the context of the EU, but may need to be reviewed to make the Union more democratic.
To achieve 'Democracy' in this sense, the power of the European Parliament would have to be strengthened and elected based on transnational party lists. The winning majority in the European Parliament would have to head the Commission and the place of the Council would be superseded by an upper house of the European Parliament (a Senate) selected from national parliaments.
EU as a sui generis Institution – Demoïcracy (A Democracy of Peoples):
As an institution that is different from anything else, a different standard of democracy is required for the EU. The idea of a demoïcracy is premised on the idea of figuring out how each demoi (plural of demos – ‘a people’) can govern together but not as one. This rejects the idea of the EU as being one state and its citizens being one collective people (essentially, intergovernmentalism).
The authority of the EU is derived from democracy in nation states, but democracy doesn’t exist in the EU itself. Therefore, these national institutions should be central to the EU’s agenda and legislative procedures. The democratic objectives and power of nation states should be protected and balanced between member states – the EU is there to facilitate this cooperation.
Benchmark: a new theory to account for the unique nature of the EU.
Commitment: autonomy of national demoï.
Representative politics: commitment to equality of citizens and states.
Participatory politics: state actors responsible to citizens of their state, individual members can choose to opt-out of EU regimes.
While member states must agree on general objectives of integration, it is still legitimate for their interests to diverge. In institutional terms, governance of the EU should be shared horizontally between member states rather than delegated vertically to autonomous supranational institutions.
A demoïcracy would require member states to opt out of certain measures where there is not support by the citizens of said member state (see Differentiated Integration). National parliaments would be further empowered in the legislative output of the EU – ‘deeply intergovernmental’. [2]
EU as a Consociational Democracy:
A consociational model focuses on forging a consensus between different interest groups in society rather than seeking to structure politics to create majoritarian rule.
Institutions of the EU should be configured in a way that doesn’t accumulate power in one institution but shares power between the different institutions that represent different interests.
As a fragile institution, the EU relies on sensitivity and balance between the interests and values of member states, collective European interests and the preferences of European citizens and technocratic expertise. Democratic authority comes from this sensitivity.
Benchmark: consociationalism.
Commitment: balancing interests and elite-driven bargaining.
Representative politics: non-majoritarianism.
Participatory politics: citizens not involved centrally (except for voting).
The division of power important, but the division of this power depends on the topic.
This model has been criticised due to being based on the premise that elites are the ones making key decisions, not citizens. The justification for this is because elites are better at bargaining and depoliticising conflicts. Radical democratisation of the EU would destabilise it. However, as the EU becomes more powerful in political policy domains, this becomes more problematic due to the lack of accountability found in technocratic institutions.
Resources:
References:
[1] Majone, ‘Europe’s “Democratic Deficit”: The Question of Standards’ (1998) 4(1) European Law Journal 5 [2] Dawson and De Witte, EU Law and Governance (Cambridge University Press 2022) 59
Comments