Do you think the European Union has a democratic deficit - Essay Example

?DO YOU THINK THE EUROPEAN UNION HAS A “DEMOCRATIC DEFICIT?” s SECTION ONE TheEuropean Union is among the international organization that is developed. It provides an avenue for viewing the democratic structures development outside its state members. Democratic deficit is a controversial issue among the European Union members and touches on issues that are crucial. The essential issues are based on developments in the future within the theory of democracy. However, the European Union democratic deficit is known for its heterogenic nature. Thus, members are not sure if the deficit really exists and the issue is still being debated upon. Similarly, possible problem potential solutions vary in scope and range (Jensen 2009, p.1). European Union Institutions In comparison to international organizations that are traditional, the European Union has a distinct institutional structure. The member states acceptance of the European Treaties has brought so many favours. For instance, the member states have the capability of relinquishing sovereignty in relations to institutions that are independent thus representing shared and national interests (“EU Institutions”). The institutions of the European Union complement each other. In that case, each has a role to play in terms of decision-making. The decisions made fulfil various functions such as executive, judicial and legislative. There exist seven (7) key European Union governing institutions. These are such as the council, European commission, European parliament, court of justice, court of auditors and the European Central Bank (“European Union Primer”). All these institutions have a role to play as illustrated below. The council main role is to set an agenda. In that case, it is responsible for the overall European Union political direction. However, it has no mandate to approve any laws. As a result of the role it plays, members have to meet occasionally after every six months. It comprises of the state or government national heads and the commission’s president. In their meetings, they do cover various issues facing the member countries. These are such as, transport, industry, environment, agriculture among others. On matters related to law-making, the European Union three institutions play an essential part. These are such as, the European Union Council, European parliament and the European commission. The parliament represents the citizens of the European Union; the council represents the state or governments of European Union members and the commission represents the Union interest. Jointly, these institutions work together to come up with viable policies for the Union. They follow the ordinary legislative process and provide laws and policies that are thorough. The policies and laws are then adopted throughout the European Union. Ideally, it is the commission that proposes laws that need to be implemented whilst the council and parliament approves them. The European Union member countries and the commission task are to implement the newly generated laws and policies. Furthermore, the commission has to ensure that the designed laws are implemented and applied properly (“EU institutions and other bodies”). The Court of Justice and the Court of Auditors have also a significant role to play in the European Union. The court of justice main purpose is to ensure the correct interpretation of the community law and its implementation in correspondent with the signed Treaties. For instance, a ruling can be made by the court if a state member fails to follow any laid down Treaties obligations. Alternatively, if the country fails to check community institutions instruments that are compatible with regards to the Treaty. This occurs whereby, annulment actions are presented before the court or failure to act by the European commission, council or parliament. Apart from the above roles, the court of justice has all the powers to give their opinion on Treaties correct interpretation. Similarly, it illustrates the interpretation and validity of community institutions enacted instruments. It only performs these functions if it has been directed by the national court. In addition to that they have the mandate in issuing of a preliminary ruling (“European section of ministry interior”). The court of auditors is responsible for monitoring the European Union budget. It ensures no corruption is carried out by responsible members. In doing so, it checks the receipts legality and expenditures. In addition to that, it examines budget financial sound management. For purposes of credibility, the court findings are availed to the public via annual reports. Lastly, the European Union Central Bank in conjunction with the ESCB (European System of Central Banks) comprising members’ state central banks implements and determines monetary policy. The policy affects European Union countries utilizing a single currency. All the above institutions responsibilities and powers are found within the Treaty. They give directions on the daily operations of the European Union. In addition to that, the Treaty outlines the procedures and rules that guides the European Union institutions in their daily activities. For Treaties to be implemented, they need to be accepted by the prime ministers or presidents of European Union member countries. In addition to that, the Treaties need to be ratified by the European Union countries parliaments. One of the European Union Treaties is the Amsterdam Treaty. The Treaty confers explicitly the court jurisdiction to monitor community instruments with respect to rights that are fundamental. In addition to that, issues affecting citizens security and freedom. The Treaties laws and policies aids European Union members not to breach any of them as consequences are unbearable. The power balance between the council and the parliament has dramatically changed. The parliament has a greater power and influence whilst the council is accountable to the parliament. The changes are ideally to address the Union democratic deficit. Nevertheless, the Council is and still remains the most dominant and significant institution. SECTION TWO EU Enlargement Process, prospects and problems During its formation on 1st January, 1958, the European Economic Community had six member states which include Belgium, Luxembourg, France, Italy, Netherlands and West Germany (Gregr, 2003, p. 72). However, as the community proved critical in assisting members achieve prosperity and promote cooperation among member states, other countries applied to join. This demonstrates enlargement within the EU but for enlargement to take place, countries must fulfil several conditions. Enlargement of any organization is described as the process of formal and gradual horizontal institutionalization of the rules and customs of an organization (Schimmelfennig and Sedelmeier, 2002, p. 503). They define institutionalization as a process whereby the actions of the social actors become standardized. Before applying to become a member of the EU, the specific country must demonstrate that it upholds the principles of liberty, human rights and individual freedom. Moreover, the country must show that its respects democracy and the rule of law as set out in the EU treaty Article 6 and article 49 (Gregr, 2003, p. 73). However, this application is a start of a long and tedious process. In most cases, the application to become a member arises from years of association with the Union. Following the application, the country is evaluated against the set out criteria to assess its suitability in the organization. The application first goes to the Council while the EU Commission gives its formal opinion about the applicant to the EU Council which makes a decision on whether to accept the country or not. Once accepted by the Council, a candidate begins negotiations with the EU members though this only takes place upon meeting the core criteria (Gregr, 2003, p. 74). The criteria set out in December, 1993 during the EU Council conference in Copenhagen requires that applicants must have stable institutions which enhance democracy, human rights, protection of the minority and rule of law (Gregr, 2003, p. 75). Moreover, a candidate must have a self regulating market economy and ability to withstand pressure from competitors and market forces within the union. Applicant should have the capacity to fulfil their obligations as members specifically, compiling with the political, economic and monetary union. During the 1995 Madrid EU Council, it was further agreed that applicant country should put in place EU rules and norms as a sign of commitment (Gregr, 2003, p. 75). In addition, the applicant should create conditions for integration by adapting its administrative organization. European Union Governance has prospects of ensuring enlargement of the union as this is viewed as a tool for achieving prosperity and security in the continent (Baas and Brucker, 2011, p.44). During the 2006 European Council agreed that EU would continue to pursue enlargement negotiations with Croatia, Western Balkans and Turkey. Under the Presidency of the leadership of the German president, EU intends to achieve complete settlement in Cyprus under the auspices of UN. EU therefore intends to end seclusion of Turkish Cypriots and promote reunification of Cyprus (Baas and Brucker, 2011, p. 47). This is expected to be achieved by encouraging economic development of Cyprus. EU has prospects of encouraging the Western Balkans countries such as Serbia, Montenegro and Bosnia move closer to the Union by promoting Stabilisation and Association Agreement (SAA) talks. SAAs talks were suspended following Serbia’s failure to co-operate with ICC in trial for former Yugoslavia although the EU openly supported Serbia’s EU intentions of joining the EU. The other prospects in the EU are to ensure integration and consolidation of the Union. To achieve the two, EU intends to consolidate the euro, manage flexibility and enlargement since this are viewed as critical areas for the future growth in integration in EU (Neueder, 2003, p. 194). Consolidation of the Euro is expected to facilitate economic integration between member states although the impacts of adoption of euro as the common currency in the region remain unclear. The other prospect is to strength the unified foreign and security policy that was brought up following tensions and conflicts in the Balkans and external pressure from America (Neueder, 2003, p. 196). In addition, EU has prospects of fostering flexibility which is currently low. Flexibility is mostly desirable for new nations joining the union. The other prospect by EU is enlargement. There different candidates for enlargement and EU aspires to ensure that enlargement would create a Union whose benefits will be beneficial to the people instead of the nations. To enhance its relations with its neighbours, EU formulated a policy known as New Neighbourhood Policy which covers programs like Eastern Partnership and Euro Mediterranean Partnership. European Union is experiencing challenges in its expansion plans. In the fifth expansion where the EU aims to bring into its fold the Central and Eastern European states (CEES), the union stands to experience varied challenges (Zloch, 2000, p. 14). Unlike the previous expansions, the present EU applicants lack or have fragile democracies (Woyke, 2002, p. 387). Moreover, the CEES are not well integrated in the economic system of EU countries unlike the previous applicants. Indeed, all the CEES are poorer than the present EU members. Most of these states had been segregated from the Western Europe after joining the Soviet Union or after Soviet supremacy and occupation. The break-up of USSR therefore afforded an opportune can to bring back these countries to upholding the European economic, cultural and political standards and EU enlargement was poised to achieve this prospects. Woyke (2002, p. 387) notes that EU has accepted candidates who fall below its standards. He explain that during the Helsinki Summit, the union recognized Turkey as an official applicant although it must have been clear to them that Turkey would not fulfil the Copenhagen requirements. He argues that prime reason for Turkey’s recognition was because EU considered it as a direct link between Europe, Asia and Near East. In addition, Turkey was accepted since it could link up Turkey to the Muslim Countries (Baun, 2000, p. 104). The other challenge in so far as the enlargement is considered touches on voting when making decisions. The voting powers have been redistributed to base decisions on qualified majority. Countries with high population are allocated more votes compared to the small countries although they receive more votes relative to their population. The new allocation does not seem to conform to the criteria of basing it on population. Looking at the major countries like Germany, France, Britain and Italy, they all have equal voting rights in the council of ministers although the population of France is 20 percent lower than that of Germany. This blocks the minority from making decisions since large nations can collude to pass a decision and win with a majority of votes. The other hurdle comes whereby a decision has to be backed by countries which have 62 percent or more of the total population making up the enlarged EU. This means that large countries have an upper edge compared to the small nations joining the EU (Woyke, 2002, p. 387). SECTION THREE Major Substantive Doctrines of European Union Constitutional Law The primary law of the European Union is also referred to as a constitutional law. The law supports the public power exercise, it legitimizes the European Union Acts, it advocates for citizenship and fundamental rights. In addition to that, it controls the existing relationship between orders that are legal, economy and public power and also between politics and law. The national constitution and European Union primary law share a variety of elements that appear in a comparable function (Bogdandy 2010, p.95). The Amsterdam Treaty highlights the principle constitutional discourse concepts in Article6 (1). The principles are such as, democracy, freedom, fundamental rights protection and the law rule. Interpretation of the constitution is often judged based on its normative, constructive and analytical merits. Thereby, the European Union founding doctrine principle task is to determine the constitutionalist approach effectiveness. European Union Founding Principle and their attributes constitutionally Founding doctrines is a term used legally for purposes of identifying and interpreting the primary law norms that exhibit a founding normative function of the European Union legal order as a whole. They are significant in determining the legitimatory foundations that are relevant while pursuing the justification of the public authority exercises. The European Union in 1990s became political. As a result of numerous debates, the Treaty authors in 1997 established the European Union based on the principle of democracy, liberty, fundamental freedoms, rule of law and human right respect. These resulted to the formation of a constitution based on liberal-democracy. Thus, it signifies a constitutional semantics to be elaborated by the doctrines of the constitution. The European Union is committed to the overall law principles in accordance to Article 6(2) which lacks constitutive function, but rather a restrictive function. The author of the Treaty in 1997, established the normative principle contents which were vital in founding the European Unions in accordance to Article6 (1) EU. This made Article6 (1) EU constitutional content to surpass the Maastricht Treaty constitutional dimension (Bogdandy 2010, p.106). As a result, the European Union constitution is not only restrictive but also recognized in the positive law. The approach being pursued legally above with a notion that is substantive highlights the voiced political decision in the Treaty of Amsterdam. In that case, European Democratic Union had to be based on Liberal-democratic postulated constitutionalism. As a matter of fact, founding doctrines are those illustrated in Article6 (1) EU in conjunction with those found in Title I EU. Title I EU gives vital information on competences allocation, structural compatibility and loyal corporation. Title I EU-Lis confirms this approach in relation to federal relationship founding doctrines between the member states and the European Union (Bogdandy 2010, p.108). However, some primary law principles do not encompass these doctrines that are overarching but aims to concretise the doctrines thus depriving them constitutional content. The Article 2 TEU-Lis doctrine denotes that, values need to be acknowledged as principles and norms that are legal. In normal cases, principles are differentiated from values. Principles are perceived to be convictions that are fundamentally ethical whilst values are norms that are legal. The European Union law was founded on principle and objectives and not values according to article 6(1) EU). Principals operate in a manner that, member states and the European Union actions are limited. On the other hand, objective signifies the intended social reality effects. Conclusion Democratic deficit of the European Union is engaging and multi-faceted and confusing sometimes. The existing debates on this particular issue have resulted to contributions by various authors and their thoughts are quite provocative. For instance, some conceive the European Union democratic deficit to be a problem that is false, not a dilemma or even a contradiction. However, it is perceived that, nothing can be yielded even if positions and arguments are restated, contested and stated. Therefore, there is need to come up with legitimacy and supranational democracy novel models for purposes of going forward (Meny 2002, p.10). In addition to that a solution based on the existing arguments need to be implemented. Individual and collective conditions are needed to yield outcomes that are desirable. For purposes of solving democratic deficit, various things need to be acknowledged in the European Union Constitution. For instance, a perfect democracy requires that the citizens should have the capacity of understanding themselves. In that case, they should view themselves as self governing as they design their laws via the help of institution representatives. In addition to that, democracy requires control from the public. For that reason, citizens have the authority of administering and controlling laws once they have been made. Political equality is also of great significance when it comes to democracy matters. This enhances vote’s equality and voice whereby a single individual is entitled to one vote and the political agenda allows multi-dimensional views. Moreover, democracy comprises a justification right. The above conditions have impacted negatively on the European Union democracy and that is why it remains an issue that is hotly debated. Nevertheless, the Union has the mandate of making laws. For instance, it is responsible for designing new laws that binds the citizens of Europe. However, it evades some of the democracy conditions. Democracy is a rule or decision made and can be adopted by various dimensions of individuals as long as it meets its legitimacy. The legitimacy should be derived from the equality of voice and votes. The voice and vote equality should reconcile individuals’ autonomy. This should be in relation to collective decision demand rather than affection and loyalty bonds (Lord 2008, p.317). Bibliography “European Union section of Ministry of Interior”. Viewed 21March 2012, from http://eu.mvr.bg/en/EU_institution/institution.htm “ European Union Primer". Viewed 21March 2012, from http://www.unc.edu/depts/europe/conferences/eu/Pages/eu3.htm “EU institutions and other bodies”. Viewed 21March 2012, from http://europa.eu/about-eu/institutions-bodies/index_en.htm Meny, Y. (2002). Democracy in Europe: Old Concepts and New Challenges, Journal of Common Market Studies,vol. 4, p.1-13. Jensen, T.(2009). The democratic deficit of the European Union, Living Reviews in Democracy, p.1-8. Lord, C. (2008). Does the US suffer from a Democratic Deficit? Journal of Inter-economics, p.316- 320. Baas, T. & Brucker, H. (2011). Eu Eastern enlargement: the benefits from integration and Free Labour Movement, DICE Report, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 44-51. Baun, M. J. (2000). A Wider Europe - The process and politics of European Enlargement., New York, Oxford, Lanham Boulder. Gregr, D. (2003). The handbook on EU enlargement, Perspectives, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 71-74. Neueder, F. (2003). Costs and benefits of EU enlargement, Intereconomics, vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 190-195. Bogdandy, AV.(2010). Founding principles of EU Law: A theoretical and doctrinal sketch, European Law Journal, vol.16, no.2, pp.95-111. Schimmelfennig, F. & Sedelmeier, U. (2004). Governance by conditionality: EU rule transfer to candidate countries of Central and Eastern Europe, Journal of European Public Policy 11:4, pp. 669–687. Woyke, W. (2002). European Union enlargement-consequences and problems, German Policy Studies/Politikfeldanalyse, vol.1, no.4, pp. 385-403. Zloch, I. (2000). Problems and Challenges of the EU Eastern European Enlargement, Rochester, Rochester, pp 1-20. Read More