At the end of last month, European Convention President Valery Giscard d'Estaing submitted a so-called "skeleton" for a future Constitution of Europe. All the ingredients of a Constitution -- values, principles, the rights of citizens, the competency of the Union and its constituent institutions, etc -- were included. This document arose despite the fact that the convention's mandate did not empower the delegates to produce a Constitution. According to the Nice Declaration, which I drafted as one of the participating prime ministers, we were only to simplify and restructure the EU's basic treaties.
As the convention worked, our mandate was transformed due to various pressures. These came from member countries, from civil society organizations, and from letters, documents and email messages from across Europe. Democratic pressure changed our mandate. When even the foreign minister of Britain, a country happy with its centuries-old "unwritten constitution," claims himself eager to have a written European Constitution, something truly has changed!
ILLUSTRATION: YU SHA
Yet, scholars such as Ralph Dahrendorf and Joseph Weiler suggest that a European Constitution does not make sense because a democratic constitution presupposes a paramount common identity that is absent in an EU where individual national loyalties still prevail. Others, such as Robert Dahl, argue that democracy requires smaller communities based on shared interests and personal relations. For them, Europe may be too big to forge truly democratic institutions.
Problems
Such theoretical objections must be set against the fact Europe already exists -- indeed, decisions are made everyday on the European level which determine our lives. We may dislike it, but the EU is part of our system of government, like municipalities, regions, and nation-states. So the question is not whether Europe exists, but whether we are satisfied with the way it functions. If not, can we fix it, and is a constitution the way to do it?
The first problem in need of a "constitutional" solution that is tackled is Europe's clear and unified identity. Not many people realize it, but because of the patchwork of treaties from which today's European institutions arose, "Europe" is not a unitary entity; indeed, the EU and the European Community denote two different things.
The community is the set of institutions created in the 1950s to establish a common market. When we decided later to have a common foreign policy, and to cooperate in judicial and police matters, we invented the union. The union deals with foreign policy; the community with economic integration. One consequence of this is that agreements with third countries that involve both foreign and economic matters require two distinct treaties: one for the union, one for the community. This confuses even trained foreign diplomats who negotiate with Europe. If it confuses them, how befuddling must it be for ordinary citizens? How can a European citizen really identify with Europe if no single "Europe" exists?
Europe's indistinct legal identity has another deleterious impact. If the community does something that affects someone's rights, he or she can go to court. But if the Union encroaches on your rights, access to a court may be closed because the union happens to have no legal personality!
The next problem to be tackled -- again with constitutional implications -- is the anonymous, bureaucratic nature of European legal acts. Criticizing institutions is as essential a part of democracy as protecting enumerated legal rights. But Europe's institutions are hard to criticize because they produce acts that ordinary people cannot name or understand.
In national life, acts of parliaments are called "statutes" or "laws," and these usually have names that you can rally for and against. In the EU we have " regulations," "directives," "decisions," "general guidelines," "common strategies," "common actions," "common positions" -- a myriad that only experts can comprehend. When a "directive" is issued, you don't know who is responsible; instead, they are known as, say, "Directive 17.62" (meaning that it is directive no. 17 issued in 1962).
In Italy there is now a controversial statute that will change the rules of criminal procedure in ways that might prove helpful to eminent public figures. Well, the name of Senator Cirami is attached to that bill. By god, we can fight about "the law Cirami!" Would things be the same if the bill were called "Regulation 75?"
Solutions
Because Europe has so many bodies that legislate -- the Council of Ministers, the Council for Agriculture, the Council for Industry, the Council for the Environment, etc. -- we cannot know who is doing what and why. We need a single legislative council, a bicameral European Parliament, with one house representing member states, and the other the European electorate.
In this simplified system, legislation will be called legislation, and executive regulations, as in most legal systems, will fill in the gaps in primary legislation. This is a system European citizens will understand.
The draft constitutional document presented last week introduces small but significant changes that may empower Europe's citizens to both identify with and criticize Europe. It calls for a single, unified legal entity. Whether it is called EU, United States of Europe, United Europe, or something else, it will also provide for a unitary, simplified system of normative acts that will introduce more transparency and accountability.
The institutional structure envisaged by the proposed European Constitution should also reflect and help develop Europe's broader aspirations. Europe must be more than a vehicle of economic integration, which is almost accomplished anyway. At the simplest, we expect Europe to be fair. We expect our social model to be realized.
We expect economic and social matters to be connected. We expect Europe to play a role for good in the world.
Of course, roadblocks await. One of them is that more Europe cannot mean a centralized system. Democratic governments are too complicated for that. Getting the proper balance among European, national, regional, and local institutions will be a crucial challenge. But if the people are to ordain a Constitution for Europe, all of their ties and values will need to be respected by that Constitution.
Giuliano Amato, a former prime minister of Italy, is deputy chairman of the European Convention. Copyright: Project Syndicate/Institute for Human Sciences
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under