A successive stage in the coming into being of European legal order is connected with the transfer of competences previously reserved by nation states. Establishing laws whose subject is all the citizens of the member nations, adjudicating court disputes in the final instance, a common currency at last, all contribute to the coming into being of an order which might be called a constitutional one. Unfortunately, so far, discussion of the draft for a European constitution has not moved on to the philosophical level. Many elements such as the institutional separation of powers, extending the area of decisions made by the majority and the like, demonstrate that the project is a step in the direction of a European federation with single public sphere, system of representation and homogeneous, hierarchical system of authority within which the states become subordinate to decisions made by the Union and retain autonomy only within a specified extent. There does, however, exist a different vision, a community of communities within which Europe would be an area of agreed upon solutions. The public sphere would remain primarily reflected in the national parliaments and the Union institutions would solve problems signalled jointly by the member states. The draft Constitutional Treaty does not bring about revolutionary change to the legal order; the gradual evolution pursues toward the federal model. However, the community model has not been finally discarded. Thus the document is inconsistent. In it, two myths compete; the European Federation and European unity in diversity. Thanks to the rejection of the document, we may reflect on a common political future rather than once again explain something which became fact in haste.
The democratic deficit affects the majority of contemporary democracies; however, it particularly affects the institutions of the European Union. The legitimisation of authority invokes four types of argument. The first of them points to the role of law and ways in which it is applied (legal and procedural legitimization); the second considers the meaning of the democratic mandate obtained in the election of representatives (democratic legitimisation); the third refers to the results of exercising authority; the fourth to the culture of the specific political community. The European Union is based on procedural legitimisation, with an immense role being played by European law; the standardised procedures of its application have until now been the main tool for deepening the integration process. At the same time, democratic legitimisation is weak. The European Parliament does not reflect European public opinion and the turn-out at elections is systematically falling. The European Commission, which should carry out general union business, is subject only to indirect democratic control which, in practice implies discretionary character of its actions. Legitimisation by results is limited in view of a small scale of budget under its control and the institutional inefficiency. Introducing a common currency and liberalisation of the market without transferring responsibility for the operation of market mechanisms on to the Union has caused a deep crisis. There is also no common political culture for the European Union. From an analysis of the functioning of union institutions there emerged the conclusion that the democratic deficit is inscribed into the logic of these institutions which were meant to act effectively. In order to ward off the current crisis, it is necessary to streamline the institutions, increase efficiency of the policies and to widen the area of democratic participation through the introduction of federal solutions.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.