John Erik Fossum

Democracy through Strong Publics in the European Union

This article explores the democratizing role of strong publics, which are institutionalized bodies of deliberation and decision-making. Strong publics are important to modern democracy as they subject decision-making to justificatory debate. This article evaluates selected aspects of the institutional nexus of the EU in order to see if they qualify as strong publics. The focus is on comitology, the European Parliament and the Charter Convention. These bodies vary in their status as strong publics, but to various degrees they all inject the logic of impartial justification and reason-giving into the EU system.

The Multilevel Parliamentary Field: a framework for theorizing representative democracy in the EU

This article introduces the concept of the ‘Multilevel Parliamentary Field’ as a means for analysing the structure of democratic representation in the European Union (EU). This concept is warranted for several reasons. First, the multilevel configuration that makes up the EU contains two channels of democratic representation: one directly through the European Parliament, the other indirectly through the national parliaments and governments. These two channels are likely to persist side by side; hence, both the European and the national parliaments can claim to represent ‘the people’ in EU decision-making. Second, this structure of representation is in many respects without precedent; it does not fit established concepts of democratic representation derived from the nation-state or from international relations, such as a federal two-channel system or a parliamentary network. Third, the representative bodies in the EU are interlinked, also across levels. Up until now, no proper conceptual apparatus has been devised that can capture the distinctive traits of this EU multilevel representative system, and help to assess its democratic quality. The concept of the Multilevel Parliamentary Field fills both these tasks. It serves as a heuristic device to integrate the empirical analysis of the different forms of democratic representation in the EU’s multilevel system, and it provides new angles for analysing the democratic challenges that this system faces.

Europe in Search of Legitimacy: Strategies of Legitimation Assessed

In this article, we assess three explicit strategies (based on three logics of political integration) as possible solutions to the European Union’s legitimacy problems. The first strategy amounts to a scaling down of the ambitions of the polity-makers in the European Union (EU). The second strategy emphasizes the need to deepen the collective self-understanding of Europeans. These two modes of legitimation figure strongly in the debate on aspects of the EU, but both have become problematic. The third strategy concentrates on the need to readjust and heighten the ambitions of the polity-makers so as to make the EU into a federal multicultural union founded on basic rights and democratic decision-making procedures. Taking stock of the ongoing constitution-making process, the authors ask how robust such an alternative is and how salient it is, as opposed to the other two strategies.

Developing a Constitution for Europe

Prologue Bruce Ackerman Chapter 1 Introduction: A Constitution in the Making? Chapter 2 Why Europe Needs a Constitution, Jurgen Habermas: Chapter 3: On the Right to Self-Government, Erik O. Eriksen Chapter 4 Human Rights, Constitutionalism and Integration: Iconography and Fetishism, Joseph H. H. Weiler Chapter 5 Treaty or Constitution? The legal basis of the European Union after Maastricht, Dieter Grimm Chapter 6: A Polity without a State? European Constitutionalism between Evolution and Revolution, Hauke Brunkhorst Chapter 7 Three Conceptions of the European Constitution, Agustin Jose Menendez Chapter 8 The Politics of Law and the Law of Politics - Two Constitutional Traditions in Europe, Christoph Mollers Chapter 9 Wille zur Verfassung, or the Constitutional State in Europe, Massimo La Torre Chapter 10 Law, Economics and Politics in the Constitutionalisation of Europe, Christian Joerges and Michelle Everson Chapter 11 The Convention Method and the Transformation of EU Constitutional Politics, Carlos Closa Chapter 12 Deliberation or Bargaining? Coping with Constitutional Conflicts in the Convention on the Future of Europe, Paul Magnette Chapter 13 Still a Union of deep diversity? The Convention and the Constitution for Europe, John E. Fossum

The EU’s fledgling society: From deafening silence to critical voice in European constitution making

Abstract The European Union is presently at a major crossroads. The Laeken process which launched the EU onto an explicit constitution-making process, has ground to a halt after the negative referendum results in France and the Netherlands. The European Council at its June 16–17, 2005 meeting decided to postpone the ratification process (by then 10 states had ratified and 2 had rejected) and instead issue a period of reflection. These events represent a significant re-politicization of the European integration process. From a research perspective they underline the need to study the dynamic interrelation between the emerging European polity and its social constituency. In this article we present a research framework for analysing EU-constitutionalization in terms of polity building and social constituency building. In empirical terms, this implies looking at the structured processes of intermediation that link institutional performance back to popular concerns and expectations. Going beyond the contentious politics approach we propose that the character of the emerging EU social constituency and its pervading effects on the EU-constitution-making process should be understood not only in terms of public voice (i.e., as ‘organized civil society’) but also in terms of public silence.

The European Union In Search of an Identity

The purpose of this article is to discuss the type of attachment and allegiance propounded in the recently proclaimed Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Charters such as Bills of Rights are generally held to be reflective of and evocative of a rights-based constitutional patriotism. The EU is not a state; there are widely different conceptions of what it is and should be, one of which is the vision of a Europe of nation states. Is the spirit of the Charter thus instead that of deep diversity, i.e. reflective of a wide diversity of views, visions and values as to what the EU is and ought to be? The article contrasts constitutional patriotism and deep diversity as alternative underlying philosophies of the Charter and also briefly examines the Charters presumed ability to produce either type of sentiment of allegiance.

Identity‐politics in the European Union

The purpose of this article is to explore the question of European identity. The EU consists of Member States whose national identities are well entrenched. The question of a European identity must therefore be seen in relation to entrenched national identities. Does a European identity have to supplant the national ones? Can it supplement or transform these? How much of a transformation is necessary? Will a European identity be a novel, post‐national type of identity? The article explores the question of a European identity by drawing on the analytical categories associated with the politics of recognition and by applying these to different conceptions of the EU qua polity. Four different options are explored and the conclusion is that ‐ although the picture is complex ‐ the EU appears to be in the process of developing a post‐national type of identity.

Democracy and differentiation in Europe

ABSTRACT This contribution addresses two questions. First, what forms and shapes does European Union (EU) differentiation take in the realm of representative democracy in the multilevel constellation that makes up the EU? Second, what are the implications of differentiation for the theory and the practice of democracy? The question is whether citizens are capable of governing themselves in a political entity marked by patterns of authority and/or policy-making that vary in unprecedented ways along territorial and functional lines. Drawing on differentiation rather than the more commonly used term differentiated integration entails a somewhat different research focus and allows considering the democratic challenges of patterns of integration and disintegration actualized by the euro crisis. The contribution establishes a set of democratic standards and assesses the democratic implications of differentiation in the EU. Doing that requires paying explicit attention to the distinctive character of the multilevel EUs structure of democratic representation.

Constitutional patriotism: Canada and the European Union

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the question of allegiance in complex multinational and poly-ethnic entities, with specific focus on the EU and Canada. Constitutional patriotism is a mode of attachment that is conducive to respect for and accommodation of difference and plurality. How thick does this form of allegiance need to be to work in highly diverse societies? I consider what might be understood as the minimum requirements for this form of allegiance to serve the necessary integrative needs for a community, and how accommodating of difference and diversity that constitutional patriotism may be understood to be. Note that this latter point is not only about the scope for voicing dissent; it is also about the prospects for exit (understood in a communal and/or territorial sense). Some claims for difference are simply very difficult to accommodate within a common framework. With exit being an available option, the conditions for fostering loyalty and effecting voice change. Constitutional patriotism, as nationalism, is a mode of attachment that is based on a particular constellation of exit, voice, and loyalty. I try to discern what kind of constellation(s) of exit, voice, and loyalty that sits best with constitutional patriotism, including how different/similar to nationalism this is. After that I try this out on the EU and Canada. The focus is on three sets of dimensions which help shed light on each entity’s particular understanding of constitutional patriotism and the underlying constellation of exit, voice and loyalty. I examine what these cases tell us about the role of rights in promoting/fostering constitutional patriotism, through focus on each entity’s Charter. Further, I look at each entity’s commitment to difference/diversity through examining their respective multiculturalism policies. I seek to identify the philosophy of allegiance underpinning each entity’s policy framework so as to establish whether these are informed by the spirit of constitutional patriotism. An important concern is to establish whether the policies are essentially reflective of respect for difference/diversity or are simply a more subtle form of integration. This should be considered together with the final point, that of exit options. The focus is on democratic provisions for territorial exit. Is constitutional patriotism based on an approach to territorial exit that is different from or similar to that of nationalism?

Europe’s ‘American Dream’

Recent years (pre-Obama) of transatlantic rifts should not deceive us into ignoring the great attraction that the United States has exerted, and continues to exert, on Europeans. This article, first, seeks to uncover the normative assumptions that underpin the US as an exemplar or polity model for the EU, as seen from a European perspective. Second, it briefly considers whether the traits that Europeans find attractive about the US as a polity model have much real bearing on the EU, not in terms of how Europeans would want the EU to be but in terms of how the EU presently is. The point is to get a sense of the empirical distance that Europeans would have to travel if they were to transpose what they find attractive about the US to the EU. Are the features Europeans hold up as attractive about the US also available in Europe? These two undertakings set the stage for the third and most original, endeavour, which is to consider whether there are entities that are more compatible with what we currently find in Europe. The case singled out here is another American state, namely Canada. A clarification and critical assessment of what is referred to here as ‘Europe’s American Dream’ are intended to serve as a kind of mirror for Europeans to consider whether the European project is: (a) one of emulating the US; (b) a unique experiment; or (c) an EU that is closer to Canada than the US. If the reality of Canada is more proximate to the reality of the EU, should then Canada instead serve as Europe’s American Dream?