6. Speed kills democracy.
Governments argue that the hasty forcing through of the Treaty is necessary because of a threatening inability to function properly. This argument is not only wrong – the EU is fully operational on the basis of the valid Treaty of Nice – it is also dangerous: If a steamboat is headed the wrong way, it doesn’t need more power, but a change of course. We therefore call for a democratic grass-roots process involving the people.
Refusing plebiscites:
To make things happen faster and without any glitches, governments are denying their sovereigns the right to vote on the Lisbon Treaty. Even though in all questioned member states a large majority of the population wanted to vote – in Germany it was 82 per cent. (Forsa poll on behalf of „Mehr Demokratie e. V“.)
On the other hand, governments are not fundamentally against plebiscites. This is shown by the fact that they regularly call their populations to the polls if they believe they will win. In France for example, President Jacques Chirac put the Constitutional Treaty to the vote in 2005, because he was sure to get a OUI. The Austrian federal government, a „strong supporter of representative democracy“ (Ursula Plassnik, ORF-Pressestunde, Dezember 9, 2007) naturally announced a referendum on the question of Turkey’s entry into the European Union, while equally naturally ruling out a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.
This lack of principle is a clear expression of an undemocratic spirit. Making direct democracy a pawn in the hands of self interests will greatly harm democracy.
Order of plebiscites:
For the Constitutional Treaty, another 10 plebiscites (of the then 25 member states) were still originally scheduled to be held. However, the governments rescheduled votes in „critical” countries, such as Ireland and Great Britain to later dates in order to build up pressure for a YES vote by then. This is also no clean democratic approach. (As it turned out, two of the earlier „safe“ votes – in France and Holland – already resulted in a NO contrary to the governments calculations).
Constitutional amendment in Austria:
The Austrian federal government specifically amended its constitution in order to speed up the Lisbon Treaty. When the population began to show signs of stirring resistance against their exclusion from the decision process, the government acted swiftly: in December 2007, it erased the enabling act for the signing of treaties like the Lisbon Treaty provided for by the constitution. This saved it some months and allowed it to push the Lisbon Treaty through Parliament at a greater pace – a referendum was ruled out for reasons of time pressure. There was no reason for the government to be in such a hurry, the ratification process of the Lisbon Treaty has not been concluded till this day!
No rush:
There is basically no reason to rush things: If the legal foundation for legitimisation of the European Union is to enjoy general acceptance and to endure, it must be achieved by a process as democratic as possible. A „constitution” which is hastily pushed through against the will of the population will be neither accepted nor will it last long, because the people will turn their backs on an EU construed in such a way. This unnecessary haste of governments is doing a great disservice to the fundamentally desirable project of European integration.
Unable to act?
One „killer argument“ of governments is that the EU without a new treaty would be incapacitated.
This is totally wrong:
The EU is – even with its younger members – fully operational on the basis of the Treaty of Nice:
-
Institution of battle groups,
-
Massive increase of funding for the border protection agency Frontex,
-
Institution of a defence agency,
- Bulldozing through of the services directive
The steam boat is going at full steam, albeit in the wrong direction. Increasing the pace is certainly the wrong way forward, because the governments would lose their populations’ support once and for all. This could probably lead to the end of European integration and a breakup of the EU. What is more important than taking as many decisions as fast as possible, is to tie these into a democratic process and gather broad support. This will ensure lasting decisions identifying people with the project of European integration which in turn could sustainably prosper.
Therefore: Democratisation is the basic prerequisite for an improved ability to act, not vice versa.
Grassroots process as an alternative:
In consequence of all the above, we demand a new democratic start, a bottom up reconstruction of the European Union.
As a first step, we demand the direct election of a constitutional convent or a drafting assembly. This shall draw up a new legal basis for the European Union.
-
This process must be democratic, involve a broad public discussion and involve all interested parties.
-
50 percent of assembly members must be women.
-
The result should be voted on by populations of all EU member states on the same day.
If the populations of member states were allowed to elect the members of the convent/assembly themselves, and those elected were able to draft the text in a democratic process, there is a high chance that the sovereigns using their right of sole decision will also accept the results achieved by their representatives.
We may also expect that the content of a treaty coming about in this way will be entirely different to that of the Treaty of Nice currently in place or the Lisbon Treaty which has repeatedly been turned down. It would presumably and naturally include elements of direct democracy while genetic engineering, nuclear power and the precedence of free capital movement would most likely disappear. Such a democratic bottom up process could lead permanently the EU out of its current democratisation and legitimisation crisis. It should actually be in the interest of all those who deeply care about the future of Europe.
10255 people from 26 EU member states signed the petition already (since September 2009) | 
