The work of John Bruton et al is quietly done

national | miscellaneous | news report Sunday March 02, 2003 15:29 by Gia

EUOBSERVER / SALT&PEPPER - More than 1,000 amendments to the first 16 articles of the draft Constitutional Treaty elaborated by the Presidium have been presented. However, what to some might seem a great exercise in democracy is to us a matter of serious concern. How many European citizens are familiar with the content of these articles?

How many national parliaments have debated them? How many parties, movements or associations have contributed to the drafting of these amendments?

It almost seems that the "political professionals" and the common citizens live in two separate and different worlds between which there is no communication. In the real world, citizens are calling on Europe and its political class to offer solutions to allay their fears and anxieties.

They want to know and understand if and why there will be a war and what the consequences could be for their own life: Will they find work? Will they still have a pension and health care? Will future generations have this? Will Europe be able to protect its natural resources and promote sustainable development? These are all questions that bring people out into the streets, millions of worried citizens who are becoming politically minded but acting outside the institutions and sometimes against them.

Citizens' and politicians' concerns differ
However, in the world of European politics and until now of the Convention, these issues have remained in the background, and the questions over which there is disagreement are of an entirely different nature. Discussions revolve around whether or not to include in the Constitution a reference to Europe’s Judaeo-Christian roots. There is protest against the introduction of the expression ‘on the federal model’, despite the fact that the Convention has not even discussed which institutional reforms would lead to deeper European integration in the federal sense.

And while Europe’s citizens are discovering that the common foreign policy they are seeking actually consists in writing documents that are so vague they do not displease anyone, article 14 of the Presidium’s draft re-proposes in substance the provisions on the CFSP already included in the old Treaties.

But that is not enough. According to the political professionals, the Convention is apparently going to wrap up its work in June, meaning there will only be a few sittings to debate the amendments to the text proposed by the Presidium. This way the Intergovernmental Conference can rectify any errors the Convention may have made in its attempt to listen to the will of the people, even if from afar. Governments will also recover their sovereign role, and the conventional method, combined with the hopes and expectations that went with it, will end up being scrapped and just a part of history.

EU Constitution risks citizens' rejection
If this is to be the future, which is what it looks like it will be, there is little reason to rejoice. Indeed, there is a real risk, that few can see, that the gap between the two worlds will suddenly become too great. In fact, Europe’s first Constitution, approved by the IGC in strict accordance with international law, could be rejected by its citizens because of its incapacity to fulfil the need for democracy. This could lead to a new kind of institutional crisis created by the uncertain outcomes.

It has to be admitted that the Convention has until now failed to do what it was supposed to do, meaning to set into motion the whole process of European democracy, heavily involving the institutions – and through them citizens – in the debate on the future of Europe. This should not lead us to say – as some do – that the objective is wrong but to create the conditions for it to be achieved. When democracy is at stake, every effort should be made to do this.

Debate should be expanded
So, it would still make a lot of sense to look to the conventional method as the right way to proceed. For example, one way of moving forward would be for the members of the Convention to agree to a document in which they call on the European Council to give the Assembly the time needed to organise an in-depth and truly democratic debate on the text of the European Constitution.

What is more Europe’s Governments would grant this extension and formally undertake now to ensure that a referendum on the draft Constitutional Treaty is held simultaneously throughout Europe at the same time as the next European elections. The national parliaments and European Parliament would immediately undertake to examine the articles proposed by the Presidium with a view to conveying their own views to their respective representatives in the Convention.

Also, the Forum of Civil Society and the Youth Convention would again be convened for an in-depth examination of the first articles with a view to determining whether these are in accordance with the requests made during the ‘listening phase’. Lastly, the parties, trade unions, movements and all the citizens’ organisations could declare 9 May a great day of reflection and mobilisation on the future of Europe. This way all citizens could present their own requests to the Convention, perhaps in the form of spontaneous conventions of young people and citizens.

Democracy was born in Europe. It would be a serious mistake if, while Europe prepares to give itself a Constitution, Europe forgets this and betrays it.

Join the debate

GIACOMO FILIBECK - President of the European Youth Convention and of the European Youth Forum