Given the institutional framework of the European Union (EU) and literature as a moral court, the European Parliament takes democratic governance as a reference point when developing its international presence through its parliamentary diplomacy. Positioned as the main representative of democracy in the EU due to direct elections, the Parliament makes decisions on a wide range of international issues, including the state of democracy. Despite the effort to produce decisions, organize election observation activities and reward democratic leadership, the mechanisms of democracy support in the EU continue to focus on other institutions and ignore the role of the Parliament in this matter. This short and snappy piece aims to shed some light on the ongoing activities of Parliament as a promoter of democracy.
Full of administrative right, the analysis of the development of foreign policy within the EU looks in particular at the role of communication between the member states through the Council, and the role of the Commission through Lisbon which created the European External Action Service (EEAS). Seeing the Parliament as an institution that only asks for formal participation while playing on the narrow lines of its foreign policy actions within the agreements, leads the reader to ignore the very rich dataset of documents produced by the Parliament on foreign policy. A sign of the dominance of this approach is the neglect of the Parliament as a successor of democracy in situations outside the EU. Analysis of the promotion of EU democracy considers the decisions taken by the member states or the Commission as the sole ownership of that policy.
EU policy scholars and parliamentary studies have well addressed the initial gap of Parliament’s neglect of the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP). For example, one of the aims of the literature on Parliamentary Diplomacy of the Parliament is to shed light on the issue, focusing on the analysis of topics such as the participation of the Parliament in the CFSP and the relationship between Parliaments and other regional parliaments. . The challenge here is to address the role of Parliament as a supporter of democracy and highlighting the tools of support for democracy can help to realize this point.
Within the bureaucracy of the European Parliament, when focusing on democracy support, it is important to highlight the role of the Democracy Support and Electoral Coordination Group (DEG) as an office for planning activities and data on the state of democracy in the EU. and beyond that. By taking electoral democracy as a reference and developing the so-called comprehensive approach, the Parliament covers this issue as an important area. To demonstrate the support of democracy by the Parliament, I highlight two instruments: resolutions and the Sakharov Prize.
Resolutions are the main document produced by the meetings of the Parliament, which become legally binding when approved by the majority of MEPs. The richness of the decision literature provides an interesting and useful data set for research. Analyzing which measures MEPs decide to use in a case is a way to track their course of action on certain issues. Textual content may also deliver insightful data that may highlight a strategy of support or naming and shaming. In order to support democracy, decisions can indicate the opinions of MEPs about the state of democracy in the country, what aspects they see as problems and which leadership should be named and shamed or named and praised. Voting procedures for decisions also make more detailed information about political or national divisions on issues approved by Parliament. Decisions, for example, in the case of Venezuela, may also provide support for a decision on sanctions by the Council when a violation of democracy is identified by the Parliament.
Complementing the resolutions, another instrument created by the Parliament to declare open support for democracy and, in particular, for democratic leadership is the Sakharov Prize. It is not only the final selection of the winner but also the list of the three winners of the award that signifies the placement of the political parties in the democratically elected leadership. The program involves the nomination of a candidate for the award by each political party in Parliament and the final vote requires a choice by all parties and the president of Parliament. Choosing a beneficiary shows how important the democratic nature of one’s country is to the Parliament and that the political communication between the parties is less consistent on this issue. Continuing the example of Venezuela, the democratic opposition was rewarded in 2017 amid the growing attention of the Parliament towards the country with the democratization of the government of Maduro.
Other examples can serve as illustrations of the use of these tools such as, apart from the previously mentioned case of Venezuela, the case of Nicaragua and Bolivia which also bring fruitful discussions about their employment. It is important to highlight that these are not the only tools used by Parliament but only two. Others not considered in this piece concern participation in Election Observation Missions and the impact of the budget within the EU. Resolutions, which are the official instrument of the Parliament, are the instrument with the greatest legal impact on the powers of the Parliament according to the EU treaties. The case of the Sakharov Prize, which is considered as a tool supporting democracy, can be the main contribution of this piece in terms of looking at the nomination and the winner who represents a statement about the state of democracy in the country.
After this brief discussion on the two instruments of the European Parliament for the support of democracy, we can see that the institution is working in the matter of democracy in the world. The reach of its actions can be limited by the decisions found in the agreements, but as the books about parliamentary discussions highlight, the Parliament has the wisdom to create tools to send its message. Mainly through its decisions, but also in other ways such as awarding the Sakharov Prize, the Parliament is sensitive to democratic processes around the world, paying particular attention to the rise of dissidents and drivers of self-interest.
Further Studies in E-International Relations
Source link
