The heads of states and governments in the European Union are starting to reflect on the package proposed in mid-2003 by the Constitutional Convention in their quest for a democratic EU that is closer to its citizens. Europe is beginning to take democracy seriously on the transnational level as well.
At this historic turning point, Olle Svenning concludes his assessment of the legacy of Anna Lindh, the Swedish foreign minister murdered on the eve of her countrys 14 September referendum on the euro, by quoting her wish that this should be the last such plebiscite. For Olle Svenning, (the) price was too high.
He is not alone in thinking this. But what is the alternative that an elite, albeit one that includes people like Anna Lindh, should run the whole game, and that the people should not be allowed to interfere? Poor democracy! Fortunately the reality looks rather different: elections and referendums have come to stay as key instruments in representative democracy. The recent referendum cycle in Europe is proof of this.
Our horizons are being widened, says EU supporter Evita Gerkina, 26, at a referendum party in the Old Town of Riga, Latvia; I dont believe that our language, our culture and our identity will disappear. The 1.3 million-strong Latvian electorate summoned to vote on 20 September was the tenth European electorate to go to the polls this year to decide either on the accession of their country to the European Union or (as in Swedens case) the euro.
More than 67% of the voters of this former Soviet republic were in favour of EU membership, on a turnout of 72.5%. The Latvian result means that ten new countries will simultaneously become full members of the EU on 1 May 2004, giving the EU twenty-five member states and a population of 425 million.
The balance sheet of the ten referenda is positive, with high turnouts and clear decisions. The closest results were in Malta (a 6.8 point difference between the yes and no votes) and Sweden (13.9 points). The same two countries recorded the highest turnouts: 82.6% of the Swedish electorate voted, and 91% in Malta on 8 March.
The referenda in Slovakia and Lithuania are at the other end of the spectrum: an 84.4 point difference between the yes and no votes for Slovakia, 81 points for Lithuania. The lowest turnouts were in Slovakia (52.2%) and Hungary (45.6%). But the minimum turnout requirements (in some cases constitutionally stipulated) were reached in all the countries involved.
A question of democracy
The bare figures hide some interesting differences in voting behaviour. Urban voters were significantly more in favour of integration than those in rural and border regions. In Sweden, only the capital Stockholm and Malmö in the south of the country returned yes majorities in favour of the euro.
At the other end of the spectrum, two-thirds of the occupants of the Latvian province of Daugavpils, bordering Belarus and Lithuania, voted against EU accession. Here, only half of the adult inhabitants were able to vote: twelve years after Latvia regained its independence, wide sections of the population predominantly those of Russian origin remain in effect stateless.
These referendums hold up a mirror to Europe, stresses Algis Krupavicius from the University of Kaunas, Lithuania, who works with the IRI Europe Referendum Monitoring Programme. The broad debates of the past several months have shown that most citizens want a greater degree of involvement in political decision-making, he says.
The differences in voting behaviour, according to Krupavicius, also suggest that a no to the Communist past a significant factor in the votes in most of the ex-Soviet bloc countries by no means represents a blank cheque for increased EU integration in the future. This is also the lesson from the decisions of citizens in Sweden and Malta. Here the people had to choose between a rather positive past and an uncertain future, making a yes vote much more of a challenge. In Malta the result was a narrow yes, while in Sweden membership in the currency union was decisively rejected.
Yet Swedes still support the EU itself, if not the single currency. The proportion of those clearly supporting EU membership has risen from around 53% to over 60% since the last accession round of nine years ago, says political scientist Søren Holmberg. A study of the result of the 14 September referendum at his University of Gothenburg revealed that: The primary argument of those opposing adoption of the euro was democracy.
In our study, 90% of voters questioned also wanted to be able to vote directly on important European issues in the future, adds Holmberg. The result puts pressure on the social democrat government in Stockholm to allow voters to decide on whether to approve the new EU constitution in a referendum in 2004.
Referenda on Europe are not a new phenomenon: since 1972, there have been no less than forty on European issues. As well as membership of the EU, its predecessor the European Economic Community and the currency union, voters have repeatedly been asked to decide on reforms aimed at strengthening core institutions. Whereas most of the early referendums were non-binding plebiscites imposed from above, the recent trend has been for them to function increasingly like constitutional referenda in Switzerland: as mandatory and binding.
In Sweden, the euro referendum was in formal terms a non-binding plebiscite, yet all parties promised before the vote to respect its outcome. Despite the negative result for the government, prime minister Göran Persson who had earlier called the referendum dubious - emphasised that it had been a democratic necessity.
The future of referenda
This is perhaps the most important outcome of the last six months: that the European Union has become just a little more democratic not least in the frank self-criticism of many leading politicians in the new member states. No one can maintain that we had a fair referendum, admits Peter Weiss, adviser to Slovak prime minister Mikulas Dzurinda, after the pro-EU result in June 2003. Opponents of Slovakian accession were obviously disadvantaged in the public media, while the judiciary turned a blind eye to clear violations of electoral law by the pro-EU side. A parliamentary committee is currently drafting a new law on civil rights, says Weiss.
Several countries are now considering lowering or even abolishing the 50% turnout quorum copied from the Italian constitution. Eighteen of Italys fifty-three referenda over the last thirty years were invalidated after failing to reach the quorum.
Yet 2003 has altered the direct-democratic geography of Europe. For the first time, in a majority of member states, membership was ratified by the direct vote of the citizens. By comparison, of the 190 members of the United Nations, only one country Switzerland became a full member as a result of a referendum.
In 2004, Europes draft constitution, which for the first time provides for a citizens initiative right at the European level, is due to be tidied up by an intergovernmental conference and then passed on to the member states for ratification. In member states where European politics has until now been the exclusive preserve of governments, citizens will have a direct voice on how they are to be governed.
The European parliament recently passed a resolution calling the member states to give their citizens a simultaneous final say on the constitution in June 2004. There have already been majorities in favour of a referendum in the national parliaments of the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Spain, Portugal and Belgium. A referendum is obligatory in Ireland and Denmark. In most other countries the issue of how to ratify the constitution is still a matter of debate.
The heads of state and government should take seriously the deep scepticism of many Europeans about the EU integration process, and engage them in the decision-making process. In 2004, expect not just constitution referendums, but vital democratic debate, in fifteen to twenty of the twenty-five EU member states.
For more analysis of the European convention, constitution, enlargement, and the accession referenda, see the 2004 handbook - Transnational Democracy in the Making - of the Initiative and Referendum Institute Europe
