“Are there sufficient institutional checks and balances, and avenues for representation of citizens to ensure democratic legitimacy in the European Union?”
Introduction
In 1950, the Shuman Plan was adopted, providing the foundations for a European Coal and Steel Community, which aimed to promote peace through economic and political cooperation, in the wake of two World Wars. This initial method of functional integration expanded to include a common market and an atomic energy community, which subsequently merged. Since then, it has undergone many enlargements and treaties to become the current supranational ‘European Union,’ composed of 28 Member States. However, with this degree of power, the question of democracy has arisen. “A governmental system is traditionally regarded as democratic when each governmental function can be legitimised by the will of the people.” As democratic governance is one of the acknowledged principles of the Union, this standard can be applied to the legislative institutions of the European Union, which is composed of four main bodies; the European Parliament, The European Commission, The European Council and The Council of European Union (though other bodies exist). In order to evaluate the extent to which the European Union is democratically legitimate, this essay will assess whether there are sufficient checks and balances, along with avenues for representation of citizens.
Parliament
Composition, Checks and Balances
The European Parliament is the law-making institution of the EU, consisting of a maximum of 751 members (MEPs), headed by a President and elected for a five-year term. Parliament appears in two forms; as a committee when preparing legislation, or as a plenary sitting when passing legislation. The roles of the Parliament are primarily legislative and budgetary, though they also play a critical role in terms of checks and balances: carrying out democratic scrutiny over each of the institutions and questioning the practices where necessary. Further, it has a significant position as the main body holding the executive Commission to account. This contributes towards the aim of the EU to create “… an ever-closer union among the peoples of Europe, in which decisions are taken as closely as possible to the citizen…” as it can be considered a positive factor in favour of democratic legitimacy that it is the elected Parliament who carries out this general democratic scrutiny and checking of the institutions, being the most directly representative of the people.
Avenues for Representation
Further, it has been considered that “the [European Parliament] is the most likely forum for representation at EU level of the peoples… a repository for direct supranational legitimacy.” This arises from the fact that the Parliament is the only directly elected EU institution, through a “free and secret ballot” , so it can be seen as the most democratically composed body. Art 10(2) agrees, stating that “citizens are represented at Union level in the European Parliament.” Whilst this is true to an extent, it is partially misleading, as it does not work on the basis of ‘one person, one vote.’ Instead, seats are distributed in a ‘degressively proportional’ manner’ in line with the population of the state. However, in order to protect interests of smaller states, there are quotas in place, that is, a ‘minimum threshold of six members per Member State. No Member State shall be allocated more than ninety-six seats’ (Art 14(2) TEU). On the face of it, this is democratic, however, “the uniformal electoral procedure originally envisaged was not created.” This sheds light on the fact that there are different voting systems in each state, and consequently, there will be a different degree of representation for each state, dependant on voter turnout. In states where there is compulsory voting, there will be maximum representation, however, in countries where this is not the case, voter turnout is seriously declining. This ‘is worrying, given that traditional EU discourse on democracy relies on the democratic legitimacy of the European Parliament. There is moreover significant disparity in voter turnout as between different Member States.’ This has led to the criticism that “The European Parliament is not a representative body of sovereign European people.” More democratic than other institutions which do not have direct elections but still not fully as there are limitations. This has led to the criticism that despite being the most democratically composed, “the European Parliament…is the institution most commonly…associated with the EU’s democracy problem”
Commission
Composition, Checks and Balances
The European Commission is considered the political executive branch of the EU, consisting of a commissioner from each Member State, making up the ‘College of Commissioners.’ Additionally, this is led by a Commission President, who allocates policy areas to the commissioners. Moreover, the role of the Commission is multi-faceted, and includes proposing new laws, managing policies, and enforcing and representing EU law. The Commission also has a balancing role, in working with the Council and Parliament to set EU spending priorities and drawing up budgets. This prevents the agenda of one single institution from dominating. In addition to this, it works alongside the Court of Justice for the European Union to ensure proper application of EU law. Furthermore, they fulfil a checking role, in supervising the Court of Auditors as they allocate EU money. In terms of being subject to checks and balances, Parliament has taken on a checking role over the Commission. Now, whilst the Commission is still not an elected body, it is considered fully accountable to Parliament.
Avenues for Representation
The process for electing the President is outlined in the TEU as ‘Taking into account the elections to the European Parliament, and after having held the appropriate consultations, the European Council, acting by a qualified majority, shall propose to the European Parliament a candidate for President of the Commission.’ This provides an element of representation, as it takes into account the votes of citizens, however, it is not fully driven by them, therefore, it is limited in this respect. Historically, the Commission President and rest of commission appointed by MS by ‘common accord.’ This would be an avenue for representation, however, as of 1995, Commission Presidents have been Prime Ministers in their Member State at the time of their election, undermining this aspect. In 2014, there was an idea to reduce representation in the Commission to 2/3 of Member States, however, the council denied this proposal, ensuring there was representation of all states in this institution. Whilst this did help to reinforce the importance of democracy in this body, Commissioners are required to act independently from their member state and in the interest of the EU, which calls into question the representativeness of their role in the first place.
European Council
Composition
The European Council is made up of the heads of state or government of all EU countries, The European Commission President and the High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. It is convened and chaired by a President, who is elected by the European Council for a once-renewable two-and-a-half-year term. The president represents the EU to the outside world. Meets 4 times a year, but president can convene additional meetings for urgent issues. Decides EU’s political direction. Consider issues and either ask Commission to make a proposal or pass onto council of ministers to deal with
Avenues for Representation
The Council and the European Council play a central role in the legislative and policy-making for the European Union. They provide indirect democratic legitimacy to the Union and provide an intergovernmental check on the supranational Commission, often by restraining the ‘federalist’ ambitions of the latter.
The European Council mainly makes decisions through consensus, though, in certain cases, it may decide by unanimity or qualified majority. When voting takes place, neither the European Council President nor the Commission President take part.
Council of Ministers
Composition, Checks and Balances
Article 16(2) set out that “The Council shall consist of a representative of each Member State at ministerial level.” However, there are no fixed members, instead, when they convene, Member States send their minister responsible for the relevant subject matter in their country. They have a significant role in terms of balancing power with other institutions, by cooperating with them and working together, such as with the Parliament to negotiate and adopt EU laws, based on Commission’s proposals.
Avenues for Representation
As Ministers are indirectly elected, they do provide a degree of democratic legitimacy, founded in their accountability to the electorate of their Member State. However, these Ministers only take on roles which they had within their own state’s government. This is an issue as voters are electing them to take care of the national agenda, as opposed to the larger scale European issues. Nevertheless, decisions of the Council require a qualified majority, but four states (or 35% of the EU population) may veto any decision. This provides an avenue for representation in that, if their opposition to the proposal is shared with other Member States, it is likely that they will be able to stop it from going through.
Legislative Procedure
The co-legislative procedure of the European Union can be assessed with respect to its democratic legitimacy. “The ordinary legislative procedure shall consist in the joint adoption by the European Parliament and the Council of a regulation, directive or decision on a proposal from the Commission.” Primarily, the Commission carries out a consultation to refine its proposal, before submitting it to the European Parliament and Council. As this institution consists of EU civil servants, it could be argued that this contributes to representation. However, it should be noted that these citizens are not elected, and thus it is not democratic. The Council’s First Reading is undertaken by council working groups, where each piece of legislation will be assigned to special committees for line-for-line scrutiny. Concurrently, the relevant committee of Parliament will receive the proposed legislation and suggest any amendments. Further, if both groups come up with congruent changes, a first reading deal will be attempted. If this is unsuccessful, or proposed changes were too different, the legislation will move onto a second reading. If after this second reading there are still disagreements about changes, a conciliation committee will become involved to resolve them. Finally, there may a third reading. After this process, and within six weeks of its convening, there must be a qualified majority by the Council or an absolute majority of the Parliament to implement the legislation.
Conclusion
Overall, it can be concluded that the EU does have evidence of institutional checks and balances, as well as avenues for representation of citizens throughout its main bodies. However, it would be incorrect to say that these are sufficient to ensure total democratic legitimacy in the European Union. Parliament is a positive example of how these. Nevertheless, there have been attempts to ameliorate this situation.