, Improving the democratic level of the European Union by strengthening the
link between citizens and their representatives
“No democratic government can afford not to listen to the voices of its citizens.”1 This has
been the motto of the European Union since 2000. The European Union is a unique
partnership between 27 Member States on the European continent. Its goal is to prolong
perpetual peace and integrate European economies. However, there is an ongoing debate
about a democratic deficit in the European Union (further mentioned as ‘EU’).
This essay will answer the following question: “To what extent do the proposals of the
Conference on the Future of Europe outlined in its final report (2022) provide suitable
recommendations to improve the democratic level of the EU in your opinion?” This essay will
review several literary sources on the democratic deficit and the nomination of the
presidency for the European Commission (further mentioned as ‘the Commission’).
The focus of this essay is mostly Proposal 38, measure 42, because by letting citizens have a
say in the composition of the EU, citizens become more engaged with the EU. Which, in turn,
decreases the distance between the EU and its citizens and increases the democratic level
of the EU. The essay mainly focuses on a qualitative method because it is based on written
resources, not numbers. It is secondary research based on multiple written resources where
the data has already been collected. Firstly, this essay will focus on what the democratic
deficit is. Secondly, it will discuss why the link between citizens and EU institutions should be
strengthened and what legitimacy has to do with all of this. Thirdly, this essay will explain why
citizens should be able to engage more in the EU and how this is possible through the
involvement of the selection of a President for the Commission. Lastly, this essay will explain
why the elections for a President for the Commission are essential and why the involvement
of citizens is significant. The essay will conclude that letting citizens engage in the decision
process for the President of the Commission could improve democracy in the EU.
What is the democratic deficit?
The debate about the democratic deficit has been going on for decades in EU politics. The
approach to the discussion on the democratic deficit depends on the vision and idea that
someone has about the EU because it has been used as an argument by both Eurosceptics
and European federalists. The democratic deficit concerns the gap between the EU
institutions and its citizens; decisions are often seen as distant without citizen input.
The most mentioned issues of the democratic deficit will be summarised below:
1. Increased executive power/decreased national parliamentary control3: Major
decisions are taken by the executive power of the EU (European Commission and
national governments in the Council of Ministers). National governments can
circumvent national parliaments via the EU level. Qualified majority voting decreases
the veto power of the Member States; there was a feeling that what a voter can
influence through their national governments needs to be more.
1
Andrea Cornwall, “Citizen Voice and Action - GSDRC.” GSDRC - Governance, Social Development,
Conflict and Humanitarian Knowledge Services, 2017, accessed 18 January,
2024. https://gsdrc.org/professional-dev/citizen-voice-action/.
2
“Strengthen European democracy by bolstering its foundations, boosting participation in European
Parliament elections, fostering transnational debate on European issues and ensuring a strong link between
citizens and their elected representatives, in particular by: “Strengthening links between citizens and their
elected representatives, taking into account national specificities and citizens’ desire to be closer to them
and have a feeling that their concerns lead to specific action by elected representatives in the European
Parliament and national Parliaments. This is a universal issue, and people of all ages should be engaged;”
Conference on the Future of Europe, “Report on the Final Outcome.” Conference on the Future of Europe,
May 2022, 81.
3
Andreas Follesdal and Simon Hix. "Why There is a Democratic Deficit in the EU: A Response to Majone
and Moravcsik." Journal of Common Market Studies 44, no. 3 (2006): 534.
link between citizens and their representatives
“No democratic government can afford not to listen to the voices of its citizens.”1 This has
been the motto of the European Union since 2000. The European Union is a unique
partnership between 27 Member States on the European continent. Its goal is to prolong
perpetual peace and integrate European economies. However, there is an ongoing debate
about a democratic deficit in the European Union (further mentioned as ‘EU’).
This essay will answer the following question: “To what extent do the proposals of the
Conference on the Future of Europe outlined in its final report (2022) provide suitable
recommendations to improve the democratic level of the EU in your opinion?” This essay will
review several literary sources on the democratic deficit and the nomination of the
presidency for the European Commission (further mentioned as ‘the Commission’).
The focus of this essay is mostly Proposal 38, measure 42, because by letting citizens have a
say in the composition of the EU, citizens become more engaged with the EU. Which, in turn,
decreases the distance between the EU and its citizens and increases the democratic level
of the EU. The essay mainly focuses on a qualitative method because it is based on written
resources, not numbers. It is secondary research based on multiple written resources where
the data has already been collected. Firstly, this essay will focus on what the democratic
deficit is. Secondly, it will discuss why the link between citizens and EU institutions should be
strengthened and what legitimacy has to do with all of this. Thirdly, this essay will explain why
citizens should be able to engage more in the EU and how this is possible through the
involvement of the selection of a President for the Commission. Lastly, this essay will explain
why the elections for a President for the Commission are essential and why the involvement
of citizens is significant. The essay will conclude that letting citizens engage in the decision
process for the President of the Commission could improve democracy in the EU.
What is the democratic deficit?
The debate about the democratic deficit has been going on for decades in EU politics. The
approach to the discussion on the democratic deficit depends on the vision and idea that
someone has about the EU because it has been used as an argument by both Eurosceptics
and European federalists. The democratic deficit concerns the gap between the EU
institutions and its citizens; decisions are often seen as distant without citizen input.
The most mentioned issues of the democratic deficit will be summarised below:
1. Increased executive power/decreased national parliamentary control3: Major
decisions are taken by the executive power of the EU (European Commission and
national governments in the Council of Ministers). National governments can
circumvent national parliaments via the EU level. Qualified majority voting decreases
the veto power of the Member States; there was a feeling that what a voter can
influence through their national governments needs to be more.
1
Andrea Cornwall, “Citizen Voice and Action - GSDRC.” GSDRC - Governance, Social Development,
Conflict and Humanitarian Knowledge Services, 2017, accessed 18 January,
2024. https://gsdrc.org/professional-dev/citizen-voice-action/.
2
“Strengthen European democracy by bolstering its foundations, boosting participation in European
Parliament elections, fostering transnational debate on European issues and ensuring a strong link between
citizens and their elected representatives, in particular by: “Strengthening links between citizens and their
elected representatives, taking into account national specificities and citizens’ desire to be closer to them
and have a feeling that their concerns lead to specific action by elected representatives in the European
Parliament and national Parliaments. This is a universal issue, and people of all ages should be engaged;”
Conference on the Future of Europe, “Report on the Final Outcome.” Conference on the Future of Europe,
May 2022, 81.
3
Andreas Follesdal and Simon Hix. "Why There is a Democratic Deficit in the EU: A Response to Majone
and Moravcsik." Journal of Common Market Studies 44, no. 3 (2006): 534.
