Direct democracy and the European Union... is that a threat or a promise?

Common Market Law Review

Volumn 45, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 929-940

[No Author Info available]

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 51949094348     PISSN: 01650750     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Editorial

References (38)

1. In France and Ireland the referenda were certainly expressions of direct democracy; in the Netherlands, the referendum revealed the lack of public support, even though the result was not binding.
2. The closest (though scarcely convincing) example is the right to petition the European Parliament, individually or collectively, under Arts. 21 and 194 EC, in the hope that it might request the Commission, in accordance with Art. 192 EC, to bring forward any appropriate proposals.
3. Including Austria, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia and Spain. Other Member States (e.g. France and Sweden) make constitutional provision for some form of popular initiative only at the regional / municipal level; others still have experimented with various national and / or local popular initiatives by subordinate legislative means (e.g. Germany and the Netherlands).
4. O.J. 2003, C 169: see Art. 46(4).
5. O.J. 2004, C 310: see Art. I-47(4).
6. O.J. 2007, C 306. For consolidated versions of the revised Treaties: O.J. 2008, C 115.
7. E.g. under Art. 22 EC.
8. E.g. Lenaerts and Gerard, "The structure of the Union according to the Constitution for Europe: The Emperor is getting dressed", 29 EL Rev. (2004), 289.
9. E.g. Dougan, "The Convention's Draft Constitutional Treaty: Bringing Europe closer to its lawyers?", 28 EL Rev. (2003), 763.
10. E.g. Peters, "European democracy after the 2003 Convention", 41 CML Rev. (2004), 37.
11. Cf. Craig, "The Treaty of Lisbon: Process, architecture and substance", 33 EL Rev. (2008) 137.
12. E.g. Vanzetta, Non-Binding Citizen and Regional Initiatives in Italy from 1948 to 2005 (Democracy International, 2006);
13. Rytel, The Popular Initiative in Poland (Democracy International, 2006).
14. E.g. Art. 41(2) Austrian Federal Constitutional Law; Arts 28C and 28D Hungarian Constitution; Arts 71(2) and 75 Italian Constitution; Art. 78 Latvian Constitution; Art. 68(2) Lithuanian Constitution; Art. 118(2) Polish Constitution; Art. 73(1) Romanian Constitution; Arts. 88 and 90 Slovenian Constitution.
15. Cf. Case C-145/04, Spain v. United Kingdom, [2006] ECR I-7917.
16. E.g. a 5% threshold (i.e. 50,000 signatures) would be extremely onerous for Malta or Luxembourg.
17. E.g. a 5% threshold would require over 4 million signatures from Germany; even a 1% criterion would require around 825,000 German signatures.
18. Either under Art. 48(2) revised TEU on the ordinary revision procedure, or under Art. 48(6) revised TEU on the simplified revision procedure for Part Three TFEU on internal Union action.
19. Cp. Art. 28C Hungarian Constitution; Art. 75 Italian Constitution; Art. 73(2) Romanian Constitution; Art. 93(3) Slovakian Constitution; Art. 87(3) Spanish Constitution.
20. E.g. Arts 18(2) and (4) revised TEU. Also, e.g. Art. 17(8) revised TEU.
21. E.g. Arts 22(2), 24(1) and 30(1) revised TEU.
22. Cp. Art. 41(2) Austrian Federal Constitutional Law; Art. 71(2) Italian Constitution; Art. 78 Latvian Constitution; Art. 68(2) Lithuanian Constitution; Art. 73(4) Romanian Constitution.
23. Cp. Art. 28E Hungarian Constitution.
24. E.g. Art. 28C Hungarian Constitution; Art. 75 Italian Constitution; Art. 95 Slovakian Constitution; Art. 90 Slovenian Constitution.
25. E.g. Art. 71(2) Italian Constitution.
26. E.g. Art. 28D Hungarian Constitution; Art. 68(2) Lithuanian Constitution.
27. E.g. Art. 78 Latvian Constitution.
28. Art. 17(2) revised TEU.
29. Art. 17(3) revised TEU.
30. Arts 17(3) and (1) revised TEU (respectively).
31. See Arts 241 and 225 revised TFEU (respectively).
32. Cf. Smismans, "The Constitutional labelling of the 'the Democratic Life of the EU': Representative and participatory democracy" in Follesdal and Dobson (Eds.), Political Theory and the European Constitution (Routledge, 2004).
33. Art. 10(1) revised TEU.
34. E.g. Budge, "Direct democracy" in Rhodes, Binder and Rockman (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Political Institutions (OUP, 2006).
35. E.g. Zimmerman, Participatory Democracy: Populism Revived (Praeger, 1986) Ch. 4;
36. Qvortrup, A Comparative Study of Referendums (Manchester University Press, 2005) Ch. 2.
37. E.g. Case 138/79, Roquette Frères v. Council, [1980] ECR 3333; Case C-70/88, Parliament v. Council (Chernobyl), [1990] ECR I-2041.
38. E.g. Case C-184/99, Grzelczyk, [2001] ECR I-6193.