Monday

13th Jul 2020

Opinion

Does EU really want to make citizen politics work?

  • ECI allows 1 million EU citizens from at least seven member states to propose legislation to the European Commission (Photo: Felix Kindermann / Campact)

The European Citizens' Initiative (ECI) is the world's first and only instrument of transnational participatory democracy that is currently undergoing a much-needed revision.

The EU institutions have arrived at the most critical stage of this revision process: the trilogues, or three-way talks between the main EU bodies - the European Parliament, European Commission, and EU Council.

Read and decide

Join EUobserver today

Support quality EU news

Get instant access to all articles — and 20 years of archives. 14-day free trial.

... or subscribe as a group

The question that the EU negotiators need to ask themselves is: do we really want to make this instrument work or not?

If their answer is 'yes', they need to get their priorities straight and heed the emergency call from 18 ECI and online campaigning experts: to preserve ECI organisers' already existing and increasingly used right and freedom of choice for online collection tools.

The ECI simply cannot afford a step backwards.

The ECI allows 1m EU citizens from at least seven member states to propose legislation to the European Commission.

The ECI was hailed by the EU institutions as one of the key innovations of the Lisbon Treaty that would bring the EU closer to its citizens. In practice, however, the ECI is extremely difficult to use due to massive bureaucratic hurdles and legal flaws governing the ECI process.

After a first wave of ECIs in 2013, the instrument was hardly used in 2015 and 2016 and remains at a low level of use up until today.

The legislative revision is a critical opportunity to blow new life into this instrument, but if the newly raised expectations are once again not met, it could be a fatal blow.

Online campaigning

EU institutions are currently negotiating in trilogue on how to reform the ECI.

Surprisingly, the digital dimension of the ECI has become a key point of contention.

The Council wants to ban the use of so-called 'individual online collection systems', which would leave future ECI organisers no choice but to use the EU commission-run central online collection system.

What may appear like a technical detail in fact has far-reaching implications for the future of the ECI.

As argued by 18 ECI and online campaigning experts in a recent open letter to the EU institutions, banning individual online collection systems would "create uncertainty for future ECI organisers" and "undermine the ECI's digital dimension".

With 62 percent of the ECI signatures collected online, the question of how to go about online campaigning is a very important one.

Only since September 2015 - and only after the many problems experienced with the commission's online collection system - ECI organisers have a real choice to make: the use of the free-of-charge commission's online collection system or an alternative software developed by ECI organisers and for ECI organisers, called 'OpenECI'.

While this alternative is still relatively new and unknown, and while it requires an extra financial investment by ECI organisers, it is currently used by 50 percent of the ECIs.

Its effectiveness has been demonstrated by ECI Stop Glyphosate, which collected the necessary 1m signatures in fewer than five months - a record.

'OpenECI' has not only been helpful for ECI organisers using the software, it has also given the commission an incentive and a learning opportunity to further develop its own online collection software and services.

On top of this, by not having to rely on a single centralised collection system, one spreads the risk of a possible system breakdown.

Worth it?

The EU Council opposes individual online collection systems because of "lack of proportionality and administrative burden in having several online collection systems."

The "administrative burden" spoken of is the result of member states' responsibility to certify online collection systems.

While at present there seems to be no solid information on the exact administrative costs involved, one could have a sensible discussion on whether one can organise certification in a more cost-efficient manner.

However, this should be kept separate from the discussion on whether or not to preserve ECI organisers' right and freedom to use alternative collection tools.

This leaves us with the question of 'proportionality': while 'Open ECI' has given the commission a free civil-society lesson on how to further develop its online collection system, the ECI costs the EU's taxpayer a significant amount of money.

The question arises: is it all worth it?

This is a question that ECI organisers ask themselves every day.

From the EU institutions, we expect only one answer: if they are serious about building a Europe of and for citizens, then it is simply worth the investment, because it will pay off in the long run and the ECI is at present the only real vehicle for bottom-up change in Europe.

While it is difficult to foresee exactly how much damage a ban on individual online collection systems would cause, ECI and online campaigning experts are unified in their call to preserve this existing and increasingly used right and freedom of ECI organisers.

If the EU institutions are equally serious about making transnational citizen participation work, they should realise that the ECI simply cannot afford any step backwards, and they should make this their priority during the negotiations.

Carsten Berg is the director and Maarten de Groot coordinator of The ECI Campaign

Disclaimer

The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author's, not those of EUobserver.

Feature

'Macron vs Orban' is no quick fix for EU democracy

A Macron versus Orbans styled election battle might lift turnout in next year's European Parliament elections, but under laying democratic problems would remain, warn experts.

Trust is 'gold' in digital age

Trust is perhaps the most important resource and the key to building successes, but new Nordic research indicates that challenges may lie ahead in the digital age.

News in Brief

  1. Citizens' perception of judicial independence drops
  2. Irish finance minister voted in as eurogroup president
  3. Italy's League party opens office near old communist HQ
  4. 'Significant divergences' remain in Brexit talks
  5. Germany identifies 32,000 right-wing extremists
  6. WHO to hold probe of global Covid-19 response
  7. China accuses Australia of 'gross interference' on Hong Kong
  8. EU to let Croatia, Bulgaria take first step to join euro

Revealed: fossil-fuel lobbying behind EU hydrogen strategy

As with the German government – which presented its own hydrogen strategy last month – the European Commission and other EU institutions appear to be similarly intoxicated by the false promises of the gas industry.

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. UNESDANext generation Europe should be green and circular
  2. Nordic Council of MinistersNEW REPORT: Eight in ten people are concerned about climate change
  3. UNESDAHow reducing sugar and calories in soft drinks makes the healthier choice the easy choice
  4. Nordic Council of MinistersGreen energy to power Nordic start after Covid-19
  5. European Sustainable Energy WeekThis year’s EU Sustainable Energy Week (EUSEW) will be held digitally!
  6. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic states are fighting to protect gender equality during corona crisis

Latest News

  1. Michel lays out compromise budget plan for summit
  2. Border pre-screening centres part of new EU migration pact
  3. EU 'failed to protect bees and pollinators', report finds
  4. MEPs give green light to road transport sector reform
  5. If EU wants rule of law in China, it must help 'dissident' lawyers
  6. Five ideas to reshape 'Conference on Future of Europe'
  7. EU boosts pledges to relocate minors from Greece
  8. Hydrogen strategy criticised for relying on fossil fuel gas

Join EUobserver

Support quality EU news

Join us