Europe: election passion

We are on the eve of the European elections, an opportune time for the malicious Russian government to produce its worst art to harm Europe and its institutions. The rise of a united Europe never liked that angry neighborNot too muchIt neither dressed up like the Soviet republics nor does now that it is in the hands of a dictator committing heinous crimes.

Therefore, it is appropriate to tell what issues we are going to decide with our votes. let’s start with Report prepared by 12 experts on the institutional problems of the European Union (September, 2023). It is worth summarizing some parts of its contents because these senior officers and professors do not write in vain.

Its first concern refers to “protecting the rule of law”, recognizing the fact that states are united in protecting the general principles embodied in institutional treaties. Various proposals have been prepared that will help reinforce his honor, as well Always strengthen the conditional use of budget funds.

In this sense – he says – European institutions lack flexibility and their work is hampered by the large number of participants involved. For this reason, they propose not to increase the The number of delegates, which should remain at the current figure of 751, But introduce a new system for distributing seats, reduce the list of commissioners or, where appropriate, establish a hierarchy among them.

As in other reports and studies, it advocates the gradual abandonment of the principle of consensus and its replacement by the qualified majority system. It has long been known that one of the most effective methods known to paralyze an organization is to subject its decisions to consensus. Therefore, In this sense, the noise of those thinking about reforming European institutions is coincidentally and old., At the same time, in the interest of democratic consolidation, there is a need to normalize the codification system with the European Parliament, within the framework of the common legislative procedure. Only the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) will be excluded, which, as is known, is a highly sensitive matter for old and worn-out state authority.

The drafters were aware of the reluctance that qualified majority voting would generate among Member States. That is why they propose, to make them swallow the pill, some measures such as the inclusion of a “sovereignty clause” that allows states to assert their positions and rights within the negotiations, Also rebalancing the distribution of votes, Also as a means of reassuring small and medium-sized states. Knowing that European solidarity is essential in the face of the increase in hybrid threats.

A recurring issue is the democracy of the European institutions. We are facing an eternal debate to which we dedicate some thoughts in our small work Letters to a Eurosceptic (Marshall Pons, 2013). There we are faced with groping “Democratic deficit” Arguing that ‘(that) is the absence or deficiency of something that is considered essential in the context of some other measure. And the question immediately arises: what is that other solution? It seems that, speaking of democracy, the logical thing is that we compare European democracy with democracy that exists in other geographical locations, on other continents, in the states that make up the European Union… However, if we mentally Let’s start the review from, don’t we have to agree that every country has a democratic system with its own characteristics that will seem normal to some and at least shocking to others? Do we not know that the Government of the United States is chosen neither by Parliament nor by the French Government? Or that many countries have clauses that set a minimum percentage of votes to reach parliament and that means leaving millions of citizens without representation? Or that the United Kingdom lacks a constitution? Or that in Sweden, in Denmark, in Spain, in Belgium, in Norway… the head of state is not elected, but is a member of a historical dynasty? Or that direct democracy is highly developed in some countries, such as Switzerland, while in others this form of popular participation is viewed with distrust? Are all these countries undemocratic because of the existence of this rainbow reality? Therefore, we conclude, there is no democratic model valid for all environments.

Overall, the authors of the report, although unfortunately they do not highlight the valuable democratic elements present in the European institutions, which are better than many Member States, but do propose appropriate measures such as harmonizing electoral laws to cover seats. Are. Apply the “Head of List” formula This has already started, but it requires a political commitment respected by all. We mean that the Parliament should elect as President of the European Commission the person who tops the list with the most votes in the elections. Where the heads of state and government sit without the interference of the Council.

As European officials continue to be accused of corruption, the authors suggest “creating a new independent office endowed with broader powers and resources.” We do not share such a proposal because we already have the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) and the Prosecutor’s Office, in addition to the Commission and the Court of Auditors. There is a greater need for officials in the states to monitor the correct management of million-dollar European aid.

However, for the judicial sector, the work contains an interesting idea: Creation of a Joint Chamber of the Supreme Courts of the Member States Which, without any coercive powers, contributes to strengthening the dialogue between such judicial bodies. And this is because of disagreements between the European Court of Justice and some member states and serious clashes full of legal poison between judges in Luxembourg (seat of the European Court of Justice) and Karlsruhe (seat of the Constitutional Court). It was regrettable. German).

There is one initiative that is not often seen: the need to enact an extraordinary law to deal with emergency situations. States have these in their constitutions and, however, the EU lacks such provisions, while the truth is that it has been forced to deal with huge crises (economic, health, natural disasters…) by inventing ad-hoc response mechanisms. Has gone. The powers of the Council of Heads of State and Government have been inappropriately and excessively increased. With no unexpected results: Disintegration of the “Community Method” and its replacement by the Intergovernmental MethodWhich so destroys the common project that was dreamed of by the Founders and some of the great Europeanists, statesmen and intellectuals of the first hour.

From a financial point of view, the measures already mentioned are proposed: enlarging the EU budget and making it more flexible, which requires creating own resources, moving towards qualified majority voting for spending and the possibility of The future of issuing general union obligations.

The options for revising the treaties are somewhat complex (see Baquero Cruz in Elmundo on 12 February). For us, what started with a conference inspired by Guy Verhofstadt and which ended with some interesting proposals seems most appropriate to sleep in the lost drawer. From there will come the convention promoted by heads of state and government.

Europe can strengthen itself in the face of its enemies only if it is watered by vigorous reasons that always support the unfinished, brave and creative European project, a constant fire.