Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
contemporary democracy1
by
Fotios Fitsilis Head of Department for Scientific Documentation and
Supervision, Scientific Service, Hellenic Parliament
and
Haralambis Kyrkos Head of Department for Parliamentary History, Scientific
Service, Hellenic Parliament
Abstract
Referenda and popular legislative initiatives constitute the main institutions of direct
democracy worldwide. By gradually creating a fertile environment for citizens’
political maturation and by triggering co-responsibility at the level of decision making,
these institutions do not annul nor substitute the representative system of
contemporary democracies but operate on a supplementary basis to it, given that they
temporarily return the primary power to its origin, the people. The paper will first
present an analysis of several types of referenda in EU Member States, followed by a
more detailed presentation of historic and recent referenda in Greece. The
effectiveness of referenda as policy tools will be discussed as well as several questions
related to their contribution to democracy and the strengthening of popular
sovereignty.
1. Introduction
Referenda and popular legislative initiatives constitute worldwide the main
institutions of direct democracy. As such, they do not negate or replace the
representative system but they complement it, as they return, temporarily, the
primary power to its origin, the people. In the Greek case, given that the Greek
Constitution does not foresee a popular legislative initiative, the electorate
exceptionally participates in the decision on state matters through referenda. Indeed,
people's decision on specific issues draws its origin from ancient Greece, where
decision-making took place within the popular assembly, the “agora”.
(Dimitropoulos, 1997) presents a thorough analysis of the different types of referenda.
Generally, referenda are separated into "genuine", which are devoted to the choice
between two specific solutions and "personal", in Latin "plebiscitum", which relate to
specific persons and intend to obtain the people’s confirmation. Subsequently,
depending on their legal consequences, "genuine" referenda are separated into
"decisive", when the will of the electorate produces a rule of law, and "consultative",
when the electorate simply express an opinion on the decision taken by another state
organ. "Decisive" referenda may be further divided into "constitutional" and
1
This working paper has been presented at the PADEMIA annual conference in Brussels, 19-20 May
2016.
1
constitutional
decisive
genuine legislative
referenda consultative
personal
EU Member States hold referenda for a multitude of reasons and purposes (see
chapter 2). EU enlargement was one pivotal reason to hold referenda. In (Albi, 2005)
an overview of the referenda related to the EU enlargement is presented, while (Doyle
and Fidrmuc, 2006) investigates the determinants of support for EU membership in
candidate countries. In the third chapter of this paper the constitutional referenda in
Greek history will be discussed. In Greece, referenda are constitutionally
acknowledged as institutions of direct democracy. However, it could be argued that,
instead of having a rather “exploratory” character, in reality they affirmed already
initiated or ongoing historic and political developments. To this assessment it should
be added that since 1974 democratic transition only once, in 2015, a referendum has
been conducted. Chapter 4 contains the conclusions of the present discussion. This
paper is based on the research presented in (Kyrkos and Makropoulou, 2014). The
original sample was enriched and post-analysis of the results was conducted. Overall,
there seem to be no EU-wide standards for holding referenda. Their legal background
as well as the process of implementation display significant differences.
2
Alteration in the constitutional provision establishing the form of government can be achieved
through referendum if not less than 3/4 of the citizens with electoral right vote in favor thereof
(Constitution art. 148).
Latvia Constitution art. 48, 50, 68, 72 President Taxation, state budget, Binding On the dissolution of the Saeima
ratification of treaties, On substantial changes in the EU membership terms
Parliament
declaration of war, state 1/3 of MPs to initiate a referendum to suspend a law
crisis
Netherlands No generic rule n/a n/a No constitutional provisions forbidding holding of non-
binding referenda
Poland Constitution art. 125 par. 1 & 2 Parliament n/a Both options On State matters of particular importance
President The Polish Sejm may hold a referendum upon a motion of
> 500.000 voters
Portugal Constitution art. 115, 134, 161, 197, Government Taxation, state budget, n/a On issues of national interest, EU matters
245 Parliament amendments to Referenda may also be held on the initiative of citizens
constitution who submit a request to the Assembly of the Republic
Romania Constitution art. 90 & Law 3/2000 art. President n/a Both options On matters of national interest
12
Slovakia Constitution art. 86c, 93, art. 102(1)n Parliament State budget, basic rights Both options The President may call for a referendum if so requested
President by a petition signed by a minimum of 350.000 citizens
Slovenia Constitution art. 3a, 90, 97 Parliament n/a Both options Mandatory and consultative referenda may be called by
the National Assembly on issues of wider importance to
citizens
A legislative referendum may be called upon request of
1/3 of MPs or 40.000 voters
Spain Constitution Section 62c, 92 par. 1 King n/a n/a On political decisions of special importance
UK No generic rule Government n/a Non-binding Additional legislation needed
through
Parliament
3
For Latvia it is half of the number of electors as participated in the previous Saeima election.
4
Regarding also NATO membership.
5
Also on 14.9.2003 on the introduction of Euro as national currency (turnout: 82.6%, rejected by
57.1%).
6
Renamed to Czechia in April 2016.
10
7
In the case of Ireland there have been 35 referenda on amendments to the Constitution. The most
significant changes appear here. The turnouts varied between 28,6 (on adoption) – 70,9% (on EU
accession), on average 52,0%.
11
12
60,0
Average turnover (%)
50,0
49,0 51,3
40,0 46,4 47,9
44,9 45,3
40,5 42,0
38,5
30,0
30,9
20,0
10,0
0,0
13
Slovakia; 6
Slovenia; 11 Lithuania; 6
On the other hand, Latvia and Slovenia are at the lower end with 28.4% and 25.4%
average turnout, respectively. These significant deviations in citizen participation per
country are not obvious and need to be studied in more detail in subsequent research.
One possible reason could be fatigue due to the high frequency of use, e.g. in Slovenia
(25.4%) with 11 referenda between 1996 and 2012. In comparison, Italy (53.1%)
conducted 12 referenda in the period from 1978 until 2009. The next chapter presents
in more detail referenda in the context of modern and contemporary Greek history.
3. Referenda in Greece
A total of 10 referenda were held in the Republic of Greece since its foundation in
1830. Table 5 offers an overview on these referenda with a brief description and
additional information on its type and the result. In the following section, the content
of each referendum will be presented, with particular emphasis on the latest, which
was conducted just a year ago, in 2015.
Results %
Year Description Type
(pro/contra)
1862 To confirm a choice on the King personal ~ 99 / 1
1920 Return of the King personal ~ 99 / 1
1924 Republic vs. crowned Democracy genuine 69.9 / 30.1
1926 Election of dictator Pangalos personal n/a
1935 Restoration of King George II personal 97.9 / 2.1
1946 Restoration of King George II personal 68.4 / 31.6
1968 Approval of a dictatorial “Constitution” constitutional 91.9 / 8.1
1973 Constitutional change and election of constitutional/
78.4 / 21.6
persons in high office personal
1974 Form of government constitutional 69.2 / 30.8
2015 Acceptance of bailout conditions genuine 61.3 / 38.7
14
15
16
8
Art. 44, section 2 of the Greek Constitution provides for referendum procedures in case of a. „crucial
national matters” and b. „Bills passed by the Parliament regulating important social matters, with the
exception of the fiscal ones”.
17
18
4. Conclusions
A common principle deriving from the above is that in most countries, important
national issues, especially with regard to EU integration, were dealt with at some stage
with referenda. Italy with legally binding, citizen-initiated law-making at the country
level referenda is considered to have, after Lichtenstein and Switzerland, the most
extensive experience in holding referenda model among EU Member States (Erne
2006). So far, only Germany has not held any referendum, maybe due to the lack of
special legislation specifying the underlying procedure.
However, it seems that the constitutions in new EU Member States contain a more
progressive framework regarding the institution of referendum, e.g. detailed
provisions for referenda with binding effects, on a variety of subject matters, and the
possibility to hold referenda by popular initiative or in connection to parliamentary
minority rights (IILHR 2009), p.3). It may be further noticed that newer EU Member
States seem more willing to put crucial matters to the citizens’ judgment, sometimes
so often that it may cause saturation effects.
The reasons for this could be found not only into the traditional community mentality
that prevailed in the Eastern European countries for centuries, but also into the
significant and unique active role civil society movements have played during
transition into the post-communist period. This involvement of rather non-
institutionalized players (NGOs, civil society etc.) is apparent in other constitutional
provisions in these countries as well.
Analysis of referenda on a European level reveals that there is no EU-wide standard in
their legal background and implementation. However, “old” EU Member States can
certainly learn a lot from the condensed experience of the new, which evidently had
to undergo within a very short period a series of severe social, economic and political
adjustments, particularly regarding transparency and openness to public.
Nevertheless, the question remains open, whether frequent use of referenda can
simply “wash-away” strategic and operational responsibilities of the Executive.
In regard to the Greek referenda, it can be concluded that the Executive in the
motherland of direct democracy, always hesitated to recourse to the people’s opinion
on crucial and highly disputable issues that entail large scale or unpredictable effects
to the lives of citizens e.g. targeted reforms, deepening of EU integration, adoption of
international loan agreements under terms of radical reorganization in the structure
and orientation of the national economy. In the contrary, and taking into account the
historical experience, it should be noted that the personal referenda were usually
conducted under some form of coercion.
19
5. References
Albi, A., 2005. EU enlargement and the constitutions of Central and Eastern Europe.
Cambridge University Press.
Best E., Augustyn M. and Lambermont F., 2011. Direct and Participatory Democracy
at Grassroots Level: Levers for forging EU citizenship and identity?, European
Union [online] Available at:
http://cor.europa.eu/en/documentation/studies/Documents/direct-
participatory-democracy.pdf [Accessed 12 May 2016].
Dimitropoulos, A., 1997. The referendum: the role and significance of the institution
in contemporary Democracy. Sakoulas Ant. N. (in Greek)
Doyle, O. and Fidrmuc, J., 2006. Who favors enlargement?: Determinants of support
for EU membership in the candidate countries' referenda. European Journal
of Political Economy, 22(2), pp.520-543.
Erne, R., 2006). Direct Democracy in Italy. Accountancy Business and the Public
Interest, 5(1). [online]
Available at: http://visar.csustan.edu/aaba/Macpherson.pdf [Accessed 12
May 2016].
Franklin, M.N., Van der Eijk, C. and Marsh, M., 1995. Referendum outcomes and trust
in government: Public support for Europe in the wake of Maastricht. West
European Politics, 18(3), pp.101-117.
Institute for International Law and Human Rights (IILHR), 2009. A comparative look at
referendum laws [online]
Available at:
http://lawandhumanrightsorg/documents/complookreferendumlaw.pdf
[Accessed 12 May 2016].
20
21