.png){kind=icon}
The inclusion of the European citizens' initiative in the draft constitution is a great success for all those who were involved in the European Referendum Campaign, which was led by Democracy International. For the first time people from different European countries lobbied together for direct democracy while the European treaties were reformed.
In this respect it is even more amazing that our first effort yielded such a success. Michael Efler tells us the story of how the European Citizens Initiative found its way into the EU Constitution.
Six steps to more democracy
From March 2002 to November 2002 our work was concentrated on discussing our concrete proposals and on individual meetings with Convention members. At the end of March, IRI Europe founded a network of interested Convention members and NGOs. The report "Voices of Europe - the growing importance of Initiatives and Referendums in the European integration process" was sent to all Convention members, MEPs and national parliaments.
A conference organized by IRI Europe in mid-September brought together almost 100 hundred participants from 20 countries. This high number demonstrated the growing and broad interest in the issue. After much deliberation we decided to push for two ideas: first (also the first priority), a referendum on the European constitution; and second, the introduction of far-reaching elements of direct democracy (a right of citizens' initiative including citizens' referendums and obligatory referendums for constitutional amendments). Our strategy was not to reduce our demands at the beginning.
It is interesting to note that during our first discussions, especially with Members Parliament, there was broad support for a Europe-wide referendum on the upcoming constitution regardless of the legal constraints (such a referendum would have required a prior amendment of Art. 48 of the European Union Treaty before adopting the new constitution, and that requires unanimity).
Strong opposition
We faced strong opposition to our proposal for national referendums in every member state on the same day. Yet we considered this demand as the only legally possible and politically feasible way. We stuck to our ideas because we saw that some MEPs especially held a totally unrealistic and sometimes ideological view of that issue. Some of them looked at the constitutional process from a solely European perspective and ignore legal, political and logical barriers.
Text by Dr. Michael Efler
In December 2002 we wrote two brief articles for the draft constitution (amendments) and we decided to initiate a working process within the Convention. But how could we do that as a couple of small NGOs (More Democracy/democracy international, IRI Europe)? So we tried to find co-inviters for a working dinner in the European Parliament scheduled for 20 January.
We gained support from almost every political group: Heidi Hautala (Greens, Finland, MEP), Diana Wallis (Liberal, UK, MEP), Prof. Jürgen Meyer (Social Democrat, Germany, Convention member) and Alain Lamassoure (EPP, France, Convention member) agreed to be co-inviters, in addition to Bruno Kaufmann of the Initiative & Referendum Institute Europe and myself for More Democracy and Democracy International.
This working dinner was a great success. In retrospect it was the breaking points of our efforts. More than 10 Convention members from several different countries and from almost every group attended the meeting. Many more showed their interest by e-mail. Both federalists and EU-sceptics were represented. The atmosphere was very focussed.
Dining with Convention Members
After introductions by Andreas Gross (Vice-President, Council of Europe), Bruno Kaufmann (IRI Europe) and myself, a profound discussion took place. The referendum on the European constitution was at the centre of debate whilst the initiative process played only a minor role even in our own contributions. All but one speaker (a Convention member from Portugal) spoke in favour of a referendum. At the end of this meeting it was agreed that John Gormley, an alternate Convention member and leader of the Irish Green party, would draw up concrete draft texts for the referendum and the direct democracy ideas to be discussed at another meeting.
Direct Democracy is supported by members from opposing political camps. It is not a question of party politics...
Text by Dr. Michael Efler
Two meetings were needed to reach an agreement on a text on the referendum. The only concession we had to make was that in those countries whose constitutions currently do not allow referendums at least consultative referendums should be held. Our original aim was to encourage these countries (such as Germany) to change their constitutions to allow binding referendums.
Yet with regard to the second text we were unable to reach consensus. Some favoured creating high thresholds for citizens' initiatives, others didn't want to interfere with the European Commission's exclusive right of legislative initiative. We suggested only covering the basic principles and instruments of direct democracy in order to avoid complicated debates on procedures and numbers.
Collecting signatures
At the end of that meeting (on 27 February), only 5 minutes were left to discuss these differences - impossible to reach a consensus. It was not clear either who should be responsible for coordinating the whole process and especially for collecting signatures in the Convention. We discussed these problems and decided to coordinate the process ourselves in close cooperation with Jürgen Meyer and Alain Lamassoure. We started collecting signatures among the Convention members that day. It was very unusual for members of NGOs to collect the signatures of elected representatives. However, noboy questioned our right to collecting signatures, and we felt obliged to fight for our ideas and for the agreed text. We left Brussels on Friday, 28 February, with eight colleged signatories for the referendum proposal.
But how to proceed with the citizens´ legislation? After almost one month of discussions with individual Convention members, we decided to seek support for a text that introduced the instruments of the citizens´ initiative, citizens´ referendum and an obligatory referendum only in the case of constitutional or treaty amendments, without specifying the procedure, the majority requirements or the number of signatures that had to be collected. When we started pushing for our second text we had already collected 33 signatures for the referendum - most of them at the Convention meeting on March 17-18 which six of us attended. Others came from the federalist intergroup in the Convention.
Calling Convention members
In between the meetings we distributed our text to many Convention members by e-mail and fax and phoned them over and over and over again… It was a very hard and sometimes frustrating job because it was much easier to contact the politicians directly in Brussels. Yet, at the same time, it was not possible to contact them all directly. On 31st March Alain Lamassoure sent the referendum text - signed by 37 members, alternates and observers - as a contribution to the Convention secretariat. At that time we had only 3 signatories for the second text.
At the Convention meeting on 3 and 4 April, we collected signatures for the first time for both proposals. At a very well attended press conference with Alain Lamassoure, Jürgen Meyer, Bruno Kaufmann and myself we presented the referendum text to the European media. After that meeting we had 65 signatories for the referendum and 8 for the citizens' legislation.
The presidium of the Convention published its first draft Art. 34 (principle of participatory democracy). It was very disappointing for us to see that direct democracy was not mentioned at all. Only "structured dialogues with the so-called representative organisations and civil society" was included.
There was only one week left to submit amendments to the presidium, but after analysing the existing amendments (four or five were going in our direction) we agreed to continue the gathering of signatures until a much more impressive number of supporters is gained.
The next Convention plenary on 24th-25th April was very important for us as well. Jürgen Meyer presented both proposals in the meeting of the social democratic Convention members and gained a lot of support. At the plenary discussion on the so-called "democratic life of the Union", many members spoke in favour of a referendum and of elements of direct democracy in the constitution. At the end of the debate, Giscard indicated that he would test the referendum idea in the presidium. We left Brussels with 75 and 26 signatories respectively.
Approaching the end of the Convention process
The following two Convention meetings (on 15 to 16 and 30 to 31 May) were characterized by a growing dissatisfaction with the work of the presidium. Many of the proposed amendments had not been even considered. On key issues such as the institutions there were still no texts and the end of the Convention's scheduled work was coming closer and closer. It became more and more difficult to find more signatories for the referendum, because we had already discussed with most of the Convention members (sometimes we felt like Convention members as well).
At the second plenary meeting in May we finalised the collecting signatures. We distributed more than 700 leaflets with the slogan "Last call for referendum" with the help of some Belgian and Dutch activists. We finished our work with 93 and 43 signatories. Alain Lamassoure and Jürgen Meyer agreed to submit the texts to the presidium the following week.
Text by Dr. Michael Efler
In the first week of June we got clear indications from members of the presidium and other Convention members that our far-reaching text on direct democracy would not achieve a consensus in the presidium (not a great surprise to us). We agreed with Jürgen Meyer to formulate a compromise text that would give citizens the right to present proposals to the European Commission, which would then have to decide whether to take legislative action or not.
This was a very small first step in the right direction, but it should not be underestimated. It is a citizens' initiative right similar to the one existing in Austria and often used by the people. The Convention plenary on 5 to 6 June was a rollercoaster that I will never forget.
First we received the information that a huge majority of the national parliament delegates in the Convention had accepted the compromise text and that Jürgen Meyer had gathered more than 30 new signatures for the new text. At the end it was signed by 72 Convention members.
President Giscard in favour
In a consultation with the national parliamentarians, President Giscard announced to our total surprise that he favourised the citizens´ initiative and that the presidium would find a way of endorsing it. Totally happy and full of optimism we went to the Place du Luxembourg in front of the European Parliament and had some drinks. Then we met a member of the presidium who told us that the presidium had just rejected the proposal by a huge majority and that Giscard was not present at that meeting. The trip back to Berlin was a very sad one indeed …
Thouth the majority rejects the proposal
After some days of feeling quite depressed, I called Jürgen Meyer and told him about the latest developments. We agreed not to give up and to try to get a different decision in the presidium. Democracy International activists sent hundreds of e-mails to the presidium members; I sent faxes to all of them also. In Brussels on 12 June we used our last opportunity to "catch" some of them for a direct discussion.
Last minute
After several meetings of the presidium and two joint meetings of the European parliament and national parliament delegates they agreed a joint position on "last minute amendments" of the draft constitution. One of these seven points was the introduction of the citizens' initiative. The last presidium meeting took place at 3.00 pm on 12 June, and the results were presented by Giscard at 7.00 p.m. in the great plenary room of the European parliament.
At that point of time we had absolutely no idea what the presidium had decided. We were all very glad when we heard Giscard speaking about the citizens´ initiative and stating that the presidium had included the proposal in the draft constitution (leaving open the fixing of the concrete procedure by a European law).
Text by Dr. Michael Efler
After all: There are still several hurdles to be jumped before Europe-wide citizens' initiatives are really possible.
Firstly, the Intergovernmental conference must deal with the draft constitution. This will happen beginning in October 2003. Then the draft constitution must be ratified by the member states, be it by popular vote or by vote of parliament.
This process can take until 2005, so that the constitution might possibly enter into force on 1.1.2006. Parallel to the ratification process we will try to discuss with positive-minded MEPs, as well as with members of the European Commission, the draft of a European law that implements Art. I-46 (4) of the constitution, so that this can be decided on as soon as possible after the entry into force of the constitution.
Text by Dr. Michael Efler (works for the German NGO Mehr Demokratie)
