The double crises of today’s democracies:Too indirect and too national -we need more direct and moretransnational democracies
An introduction to a debate at the National Centre forResearch on Europe at the University of Canterbury
by Andreas Gross (Switzerland)
Director of the Scientific Institute for Direct Democracy in St.Ursanneand Swiss MP & Leader of the Social-Democrats in theParliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE)
Christchurch, 19 th of June 2008
www.andigross.ch info@andigross.ch
An overview of mypresentation:
I.The banalisation of today’s democracy/ies
II.The (utopian) project of Democracy
III.What more Direct Democracy would really mean
IV.How transnational Democracy would look:EU-Constitution and global democracy without aglobal state
V.Could the Council of Europe’s experience serve as asource of inspiration for the globaldemocracy building ?
VI.Where is New Zeeland in all this ?
I. We should overcome thebanalisation of the termsFreedom and Democracy
Democracy is more then a choice;
it enables us to be free.
Freedom means, to act together
on our common life
(« Life is not a destiny »)
Democracy constitutes the rules,
rights and procedures in order
to prevent conflicts to be solved violently
II. The (utopian) project ofDemocracy
•• To be able to participate in all decisions
which concerns you !
(procedural (design/institutional) challenge)
•• Freedom is not a privilege !
Democracy has to deliver to -
enable all to be capable to act and to be free
III.Representative democracy is anessential part of Democracy.But it should not havethe monopole of Democracy !
Indirect Democracy (ID) enables you to vote yourrepresentatives;
Direct Democracy (DD) enables you to vote onimportant issues you don’t want to leave to yourRepresentatives;
The citizens should be able to decide, when they wantto decide themselves - this would also makerepresentative Democracies more representative !
The democratization of Democracy isan ongoing, never ending process:Every democracy is unfinished,DD is a little bit less unfinished than ID !
Democracy was reduced to represent. Democracy ina time, where most people couldn’t read or write andwere enable to make political judgments !
Today modern citizens know often as much aboutpolitics as MP’s: They feel frustrated that ID excludesthem and reduces them to objects instead of thesubjects of politics.
A society in which citizens feel excluded looses aenormous amount of creative potentials, missescollective learning options and undervalues itself !
A bit more Direct Democracy means thatyou share more power with the citizens, theonly source of legitimate political power
Nobody should have so much power, that he or shehas the “privilege” not to have to learn...
Sharing the political power, that means, giving 2 % ofthe citizens the power to ask for a Referendum on alaw voted in the Parliament or a legisl.change theypropose to the society, means:
Everybody has to listen more -
Everybody tries to convince and to discuss
Politics become softer, more inclusive and morecommunicative !
In order to avoid a alienation between thecivil society and it’s political system , DirectDemocracy has to be carefully designed !
No quick fix: Everybody (Citizens, MP’s, administ.,society) needs and gets the time they need :
A Referendum is a process over 2 - 4 years:
1 year for the citizens, 1 year for Gov+Parl., 1/2 a yearfor the Public debate and campaign !
In order to share the power and not to be exclusiveand make the system responsive you should ask morethan 1% of the electorates signatures for aReferendum and not more than 2% for a popularproposition (“Initiative”)
No quorums: They kill communication !
In a carefully designed DD youhave to understand real changeas a collective learning process
Everybody has the right to propose where and howhe or she thinks changes are needed (Open AgendaSetting and Attention providing)
More public debates and private discussions (the soulof DD) create a much better informed society
The invitation to decide, creates a sense of belonging(Integration)
The right to participate, reduces distances andincreases identifications (“Democratic patriotism”)
After you participated in the decision making, you arebest qualified to implement the decision
IV. DD on local ( regional) and national levelis a way to restore confidence in democracyin order to constitute Democracy on theEuropean and global level
• • DD reduces apathy and zynism
•• DD restores trust in yourself and others
•• DD reduces the personalization of politics and opensthe public sphere to the essential and hidden questionsof the society and our times
“Today the nation-state is too big for thesmall things - to small for the big issues” -Democracy is today similar to the ruder of a boat,which lies in the water,but the ruder does not touch the water anymore!
That’s why the EU/UN do not only need moredemocracy in order to be able and to get thelegitimacy to do more and better,
but democracy needs also Europe and theGlobe, when it wants to deliver in a time ofglobal markets !
Democratization of the EU means:We have to contribute to overcomethe input part of the EU legitimacydeficit, whose effects are dramatic:
No citizen participation (Feelings ofPowerlessnes)
Elite domination (Social Distance(D))
Centralistic and bureaucratic (strc D)
No common public sphere (comm D)
No common identity (Cultural D)
No feeling of togethernesness /common belonging (emotional D)
Let’s not forget:The quality of Direct Democracy (DD)depends of it’s design -a well designed DD contributes to:
Communication and Deliberation
Sharing of power
Public and individual learning
Citizens acting and more transparency
Integration of diversity by civic participation
Legitimacy by convincing
More identification, less distances
More openness for other policies andactors
V. For building a globaldemocracy we have to choosebetween , or combine differentpossibilities:
••Getting inspired by the European Human RightsConvention (EHRC) with it’s individual right to bringyour state to a international Court, but globalize andenlarge it (Non-state-powers, more then the classicalfreedom rights...)
••Make a global constitution which gives to everyperson a status without founding a world-state anddestroying the citizenship in and the nation-state itself.
••Build a second/third chamber of MP’s/NGOs in theUN-General Assembly, in order to give the “People ofthe world” really a representation...
V. Where is NZ in all this ?
••How much Direct Democracy you got with the“Citizen Initiated Referendum” (CIR) - not bin-ding, agenda-setting only, no new legal norm ?
••How big is the distance between citizens and theMP’s - how representative is the NZ-representative democracy - does your politicalsystem realize the democratic potentials of yoursociety ?
••How much motivation have the Nzders to act fora global democracy ? How much theGovernment would support them ?