“As politicians we have to react to the fact that many people do not feel that they can relate to the EU.” Angela Merkel
For 52 per cent of Germany’s population a strong, democratic co-termination is the most crucial element of a European identity (Aktion Europa) but when we observe the European Union or more specifically the European parliament, the question occurs if the EU is suffering from a democratic deficit and if the directly elected Parliament is able to abolish this deficit. The aim of the essay is to discuss that question.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. In General
3. The 2009 European parliament’s election
4. The history of the European Parliament’s election: from indirect to direct representation
5. The European Parliament – an appropriate instrument for demolishing the democratic deficit?
6. Is a directly elected European Parliament a way out of the democracy deficit?
7. Conclusion
Objectives and Themes
This essay aims to evaluate whether a directly elected European Parliament can effectively address and resolve the perceived democratic deficit within the European Union by analyzing the development of the electoral process and the current institutional challenges.
- The evolution of the European Parliament from indirect representation to direct elections.
- An analysis of the 2009 European Parliament election results and voter turnout.
- Theoretical perspectives on the EU's "democratic deficit" and the concept of the "non-demos."
- The role of political parties and the challenges of creating a cohesive European political space.
- The relationship between national political interests and European institutional legitimacy.
Excerpt from the Book
The European Parliament – an appropriate instrument for demolishing the democratic deficit?
The term ‘democratic deficit’ in a European context was first used by the British academic and former Labour party MP David Marquand in 1979. He described the weakness of the democratic legitimacy of the European Community Institutions. In his opinion a way out of that misery only would have been direct elections of the European Parliament. Those first elections in 1979 however did not stop the debates about the democratic deficit. It rather got more attention from several politicians as well as scholars, due to the fact that the Parliament was now the only directly elected institution of the Community and became therefore politically more important, although this did not lead in gaining more powers. The debate did not lose its appeal all over the period of deepening the European integration through the European Single Act, which introduced the consultation procedure and set a plan for the implementation of the Internal Market (Milev: 10 – 12)
When it comes to debate if the European Union is suffering from a democratic deficit, three perspectives occur in every discussion.
The first to explain is the so called “non-demos” one with the central idea that the European Union does not have common peoples (demos) with shared histories and cultures like a national demos used to have it. Therefore it is simply not possible to practise democracy on the European level. A consequence of this view is that the European parliament is only an expensive irrelevance (Siedentop 2000 cited in Peterson, Shackleton 2006: 118 – 119).
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: Outlines the research question regarding the EU's democratic deficit and the potential role of the European Parliament in addressing it.
2. In General: Provides an overview of the current electoral regulations, highlighting the lack of a common European electoral law and the variance between member states.
3. The 2009 European parliament’s election: Analyzes the 2009 election data, focusing on voter turnout and the rise of euro-critical and populist parties.
4. The history of the European Parliament’s election: from indirect to direct representation: Documents the development of the Parliament from its origins as a common assembly to the first direct elections in 1979.
5. The European Parliament – an appropriate instrument for demolishing the democratic deficit?: Discusses the origins of the "democratic deficit" concept and introduces three primary academic perspectives on the EU's legitimacy.
6. Is a directly elected European Parliament a way out of the democracy deficit?: Evaluates the limitations of the current system, including low turnout and the dominance of national policy priorities over European topics.
7. Conclusion: Summarizes that while the Parliament offers a path to increased democracy, its current impact is hampered by a lack of public engagement and limited legislative powers.
Keywords
European Parliament, Democratic Deficit, Direct Elections, European Union, Voter Turnout, Legitimacy, Non-demos, European Integration, Member States, Proportional Representation, Political Parties, Institutional Reform, Lisbon Treaty, Political Representation.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this research paper?
The paper explores the democratic deficit within the European Union and questions whether a directly elected European Parliament serves as a sufficient tool to overcome this legitimacy gap.
What are the main thematic pillars of the work?
The central themes include the evolution of electoral laws, the significance of the 2009 elections, the theoretical "non-demos" debate, and the structural limitations of the European Parliament.
What is the central research question?
The author asks whether a directly elected European Parliament can genuinely abolish the democratic deficit of the European Union.
Which scientific methodology is employed?
The study utilizes a descriptive and analytical approach, synthesizing existing literature, historical documents, and statistical election data to evaluate institutional legitimacy.
What topics are discussed in the main body of the paper?
The main body covers the history of European elections, an analysis of the 2009 election results, and an examination of various theoretical perspectives regarding European democratic legitimacy.
Which keywords best characterize this research?
Key terms include democratic deficit, European Parliament, direct elections, voter turnout, European integration, and institutional legitimacy.
How did the appointment of MEPs function before the first direct elections?
Prior to 1979, members of the "Common assembly" were appointed by the national parliaments of the member states, leading to the issue of the "dual mandate."
What is the "non-demos" thesis mentioned in the text?
It is the argument that the EU lacks a common people (demos) with shared history and culture, rendering true democracy at the European level impossible.
Why is voter turnout considered a critical factor for the European Parliament?
Low voter turnout is viewed as a significant indicator of a lack of political interest and a perceived disconnect between European citizens and the institutions in Brussels and Strasbourg.
- Citation du texte
- Nina Eder-Haslehner (Auteur), 2010, Can a directly elected European Parliament abolish the democratic deficit of the European Union? , Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/166322
