How Democratic The European Union

When identifying the presence of a democratic deficit in the European Union, it is important to consider a range of factors, including international treaties and the effect they had on its structured governmental framework. One of the first official agreements established by the European Union (formerly

However, this should not necessarily disqualify the EU from being treated as a democratically legitimate body. Andrew Moravcsik believes concern about the EU’s ‘democratic deficit’ to be misplaced. Judged against existing democracies, rather than ideal parliamentary democracy, the EU is legitimate. Most critics

Further, the Commission’s institutional structure is a factor putting great weight on perceptions of the democratic deficit since it lacks democratic credentials yet largely dominates EU law-making in spite of the presence of the EP as its democratic face. Commissioners are not elected, directly nor indirectly, as is with most sovereign executives. Follesdal and Hix however argue that the exercise of these executive powers requires contestation of political leadership and policy. They also suggest that direct elections by citizens or national parliaments should be allowed for the contestation of the Commission President who holds the most powerful EU executive position, so as to increase democratic input. Contrary to this position is that of Moravcsik, who discounts the idea of elections as a possible remedy and rejects the notion of

The EU being an example of democratic deficit can be argued both ways one being bad for people because they can make laws that the people don’t like but they have to follow them regardless and the other being the fact that the EU makes laws that helps the country as a whole such as education and health.

On 25 March 2017, the European Union will celebrate the 60th anniversary of its existence. Nevertheless, the European Council and the presidents of the twenty seven member states are aware that it is not a perfect union.

The democratic deficit is a theory developed by scholars in order to illustrate that the European Union and its institutional bodies suffer from a lack of democracy (Wincott, 1998, p. 414). However, there are many definitions of the democratic deficit (Chryssochoou, 2000; Justice, 1996; Warleigh, 2003; Weiler, Haltern & Mayer, 1995) depending on the views and approaches of each scholar. Joseph Weiler's ‘standard version' of the democratic deficit is one of the most common definitions and it is a set of widely-used arguments by academics, scholars and the media (Weiler et al., 1995, cited by Follesdal & Hix, 2005, p. 4). It consists of five claims that explain why the EU can be called undemocratic and they are the following: a) there is an

In this assignment I will be assessing the democratic accountability of the European Union. I will begin by briefly describing the institutions, their functions, compositions and discuss how they work as check and balance system to ensure democratic accountability further to look on to how laws are made and what they are In order to establish whether or not the EU is in fact answerable to its citizens.

The European Union (EU) is fundamentally democratic and is evident through its institutions, however, the current democratic electoral structure is of great concern. The EU is a new type of political system, often referred to as a sui generis, implying its uniqueness as there exists and a non comparable political body. The EU can neither regarded as a ‘state’ nor as an ‘international institution’ as it combines supranational as well as intergovernmental characteristics (Hix, 1999, p7). In this regard it has developed its own understandings of what democracy is. It is evident that the development of and spread of democracy is a central concept and foundation to all politics within the EU, and remains focuses on makings its governing

This paper will assess the claim that supremacy of EU law is still an evolving and debatable concept. To do this, I have divided this paper into four sections. The first section will discuss the establishment of supremacy in EU law through ECJ case law. The second section will explore the vibrant debate surrounding constitutional pluralism that has arisen since the early 1990s. The third section will examine the debate and impact of the codification of primacy in the early 2000s. The fourth section will examine the extent to which the principle of sovereignty has been accepted in three EU Member States, namely, the United Kingdom, Germany, and Poland.

Interest groups maintain the capacity to speak for citizens who have these other main priorities ensuring that their opinions and interest are represented within the European Union. This utility goes a long way towards reducing the democratic deficit of the Union. Although the public may not have time or energy to direct their interests to their representatives, so long as they know that there is a group or organization representing their interests in Brussels, they may be more inclined to view the Union as democratic.

One of the most controversial debates in the history of European Union (EU) is if there is a democratic deficit in the EU. On the one hand, many scholars argued that the democratic deficit exists in the EU. On the other hand, there are other scholars who claimed that there is not a democratic deficit in the EU. In this essay, the writer will support the argument that the democratic deficit in the EU exists and will propose how this deficit can be reduced. In the first part of this paper the arguments, which support the existence of the democratic deficit, will be discussed. After that, this essay will present the claims that there is no democratic deficit in the

The structure and formation of the EU executive has proved to be a major debate over the years. The major question which continues to arise is: Should the EU have a dual executive where policy making is divided amongst the Commission and the Council? Or should the EU have a single institution where either the Commission or the Council has a more dominant and superior leadership role? Simon Hix defines this dual executive model as ‘a separation of powers’ (Hix and Hoyland 2011). In order to understand whether this separation is good or bad we must outline the power each institution has and inevitably their role in the formation of policy-making in the European Executive. Over the course of this essay I shall discuss the advantages and disadvantages of a dual executive model on an EU level.

Accession of new members from Eastern Europe into the union is possible only through good governance, effective institutions, and quality democracy. Good governance creates effective institutions. These institutions produce quality democracy. Established member states want a democratic sub-continent which will support expansion towards Eastern Europe. Next I evaluate the literature in order to establish whether EU institutions have the real power to impact the quality of democracy in Eastern European and Balkan members in order to support EU expansion.

“Most voters seem to take the opportunity to give the incumbent national government a ‘good kicking’ during European elections, as seen in the UK, Spain and France, rather than vote on a broad manifesto of ideas. This is fuelled further by MEPs campaigning on local issues rather than European ones.” This is an example of part of the democratic deficit in the European Parliament. To further show how there is a democratic deficit in the European Parliament I will explain how it is largely inaccessible to its European citizens and how the European Parliament lacks the power that it requires to resolve the problems in the Union. I will then describe some unsuccessful attempts at solutions and conclude with some possible future remedies.

The European Union (EU) was 'founded on the principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law'. Democracy can be interpreted in different ways, for it means "the power of the people" where the public decide who they want as they leader by a majority vote system who represents the views of the people. Lisbon Treaty gave these rights the force of law therefore these rights are not to be violated by member states and must maintain a healthy baseline of democracy. Many academics have argued that the EU is suffering from a 'democratic deficit' due to the Euopean not having enough power and for other reasons which will be discussed. I will discuss the observation of Joseph Weilers 'standard version' of the democratic deficit and analyze the strengths and weaknesses of his argument. This essay will examine the reasons why many academics and authors believe there is a democratic deficit. Further discussions will point to renowned intellectuals who reject the idea of democratic deficit , such as Professor Andrew Moravcsik and Proffesor Giandomencio Majone who both refute the idea that the EU lacks democratic accountability- for different reason which will be discussed in detail. My conclusion will include my belief that the EU does suffer from a democratic deficit and this will be supported by the powerful evidence that will be stated throughout this essay.