Abstract
On 13th October 2005 was launched the Commission's “Plan D” for Democracy, Dialogue and Debate, which intends to “lay the foundations for the profound debate about Europe's future” in order to “mak[e] the European Union more democratic” . This strategy is a reply to the appeal for “a broad debate” made during the European council of June 2005, which took place in a context of ‘shock', after the French and the Dutch negative referenda. These “no” have been considered to some extent to stem from the European democratic deficit and the remoteness of the European Union (EU) from its citizens.
This issue has been regularly highlighted since the 1970s. It has been frequently referred to as a “parliamentary deficit” and many attempts have been made to address this paradoxical situation : direct election of the European Parliament (EP) in 1979, steady increases in the EP's powers, endeavors to set up a dialogue with European citizens, etc. Nevertheless, the democratic deficit appears severely rooted. But is it a sufficient reason to acknowledge that the European Union will never be fully democratic?
In order to answer this question, we will first examine the meaning of “democracy” and thus the alleged European “democratic deficit”. We will then come up with a solution for the EU to overcome this deficit.
Our modern societies emphasize respect for the concept of “democracy”. However, this ideal doesn't refer to a clearly defined idea, as it has been given different meanings throughout History. Etymologically, for instance, it means ‘the people's power' and it expressly refers to the direct democracy exercised in the Greek city-states. In our contemporary conception, the power is still thought as stemming from the people but delegated to representatives who take decisions on citizens' behalf – since it is concretely impossible to apply a system of direct democracy in our vast and populous states. This principle of delegation is attached to few other elements such as conditionality which supposes that “politicians are under a structural imperative to deliver to the electorate and to communicate their achievements”.
But it also presumes the equality of every citizen and the existence of a formal Parliament. These four elements are necessary to a representative democracy which constitutes the current “standard of legitimacy”. The fulfilment of these criteria would thus attest the democratic nature of a state.
