Lessons from the history of the Swiss Democracy for the Making of a European Constitution Budapest Forum “Towards a More Democratic Europe” November 20 th 2006 by Andreas Gross (Switzerland) Director of the Scientific Institute for Direct Democracy in St. Ursanne (JU/CH) and Swiss MP/PACE

Every country has specific historical achievements, which may serve the European integration process   There integration in the European Constitution allows the European people(s) to recognise and identify themselves with it   This would serve the integration of variety

Switzerland owes the success of it’s 1848 Revolution and modern existence to Europe - now it may offer it’s best back   Republican notion of politics   Direct Democracy   Decentralisation of power (Federalism)

a. The Republican notion of politics is possible   Freedom is a opportunity to act, not something to be consumed   The citizen is permanently the last point of reference   The constitution is an open end process; agreements have always to be renewed

b. Direct Democracy (DD) is possible and serves the transnational integration process   DD is a achievement of the Swiss opposition movement(s) in the 1860’s   DD was the answer of an elitist notion of Democracy and an elitist practise of representation   DD serves to integrate differences and diversities

c. Federalism means sharing and decentralization of power and allows to unite diversity and unity   F prevents centralisation and over- bureaucratisation   F means to solve problems where it may best serve citizens   F empowers citizens, communes, regions and nations   F allows to cumulate identities

We should overcome the banalisation of the term “Constitution” Treaties and Constitutions have different potentials A constitution is an open agreement between citizens how the power is shared and democracy should be organised An agreement has to be made by the people themselves When you ask the people at the end, you should integrate them in the process of the making

Which are the basic products of Direct Democracy’s best practices ? Those the EU needs most !   Individual / collective communication & deliberations   Collective learning potentials   Rich public spheres   political openness et legitimate polity   citizens have to be taken seriously   Identification with the DD process (« Democratic patriotism »)

The EU-CT-Process 2002/5 suffered from design-deficits   It was not a Constitution-Making-Process   The Convention was handpicked, govern- mental orientated and autocratically ruled   It lacked time, transparency, public deliberation and participation   It was a national reproduction instead of a transnational polity creating effort

The DD essentials for the specific needs of the EU and a innovative way of their use   Constitutional founding EU-people(s) Ref.   Constitutional Reform-Initiative   A three way Initiative: 1. Qualification (100’000) 2. Initiative for the EP (1 Mio) 3. In neg.Case: 2. Mio: Ref

The rights you get from the EU- Com after submission of a Qualification Initiative (QI)   Translation Voucher (20 languages./ max signs)   Website-Building-Support   Train&Flight vouchers for public meetings   A Howtodo-Handbook with clear Guidelines   Commissions offices in the capitals are supposed to support you   National papers advertisement voucher

The biggest misunderstandings in CH/EU/DD-Debates:   „Tradition“ is not a difference: Pre-revolutionary CH- Oligarchy/Elitist 1848er leaders   Size is a cultural notion   Differences were in CH 1848 bigger than in the EU today   Similar basic motivations: Overcoming errors, economic needs and value-projects   Belgium Resistance Reference 1942