Citizens Parliament

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Citizens parliaments ( English Citizens' juries ) are civil bodies consisting based on juries , made up of a representative cross-section of all citizens of a state composed and currently mostly regional political issues or planning processes pick up, handle and vote on it to politics and administration to support an advisory ( Deliberative democracy ).

to form

Citizens' parliaments appear in different forms around the world, as they are bound by the rule of law in the country in which they operate.

The democratic deficit felt in the European Union is reducing the public's trust in what is known as representative democracy, including in the member states. Following the example of individual, local “democracy projects” that have already existed for a number of years, the call for alternative forms of democracy and thus for more citizen participation is growing louder, which calls for “real representativeness” of the people.

“A community in which elections are still held […], but in which competing teams of professional PR experts control the public debate during the election campaigns so much that (sic) it degenerates into a pure spectacle in which one can only discussed a number of problems that the experts selected beforehand. "

- Colin Crouch : Postdemokratie , Bonn 2008, ISBN 978-3-89331-922-0 , p. 10.

Even if existing, regionally acting platforms have the addition “ Parliament ” in their name , this suggests, from the previous political terminology and application, a supra-regional, national issue that currently only exists in this form in Switzerland .

Features of citizens' parliaments

Citizens' parliaments find their common denominator in their personal composition, as their work and the resulting results are legitimized by the citizens of the respective region. This composition could even act as an “EU citizens' parliament” across borders.

The essential, ideal-typical characteristics of nationally operating citizens' parliaments are:

Participation

In contrast to the Swiss model of democracy in which all voting citizens ( voters ) at a referendum are invited citizens parliaments come up with a statistically - representative cross-section from to yet a reliable statement of approximately 95% ( confidence level ) to achieve about how all citizens in Survey trap. This ensures faster and more efficient preparation and processing times as well as significantly lower advertising costs.

Candidate selection

One of the most important characteristics of citizens' parliaments is the way in which candidates are selected. This is ideally done by lottery (aleatoric democracy or demarchy ), but can be supplemented by dialogue-oriented advice and decision-making or by an election process. In ancient Athens , the members of important state organs were determined by lottery. This can range from simple drawings to complex systems, such as the Venetian voting process .

As a matter of principle, not only advocates of the topic, but also representatives of the opposing side are actively involved in discourse and voting. This guarantees results with the least resistance in the subsequent implementation. This ensures that a group of citizens cannot (as in a referendum) decide the fate of a smaller one simply by majority vote, as is the case today.

As soon as a topic under discussion has been concluded by the current parliament through its resolution, new candidates must be selected for the next citizens' parliament. This means that corruption and the influence of lobbying can almost be ruled out.

Voting

In the extension of a pure direct democratic vote ( yes / no questions ), only arguments and deliberative (dialogue-oriented, advisory) decisions apply to citizens' parliaments . The arguments are prepared with as large a participation as possible and underpinned with various preliminary studies (surveys, tests). Once all sides have been heard, the citizens' parliament considers the pros and cons among themselves in a “ structured debate ” and, if necessary, collects any missing information from experts.

Voting should take place “ systemically ”, which means that not only the pro-votes make the decision, but only deductively all decision proposals are removed for which the proportion of rejections is too high. This produces results that are subject to the least resistance, because a result that is wanted by 51% but strictly rejected by 49% will almost always end in discomfort.

Existing forms of citizen participation

These appear worldwide with a wide variety of names, such as citizen participation, citizen decision, citizen forum, citizen report, citizen conference, citizen council, citizen vote, but also with citizen parliament, without the claim nationwide validity.

Below are a few examples of forms of public participation.

In German-speaking countries

With regard to direct democratic co-determination, Switzerland is currently the only country in the world that allows not only regional but also national issues to be voted on by its citizens.

In Germany there are several regional citizen participation models with different names.

  • Citizen Candidates
  • Citizens Parliament
  • Munich Citizens Parliament
  • Planungszelle.de

In Austria , the first citizens' parliament was held on September 9, 2017, shortly before the 2017 National Council election , by the Austrian small party Every vote GILT . The topic should be found which the G! ​​LT mandataries have to deal with first (in the event of a move into parliament). After a preparatory phase of around three weeks, the citizens 'parliament decided as a result that education policy was the most important and urgent issue for Austria, which was then worked out in more detail as a template for another citizens' parliament.

Worldwide

Australia : The first Australian city with a form of participation known as the Australian Citizen Parliament (ACP) was Canberra in Australia (2009). In a three-day deliberation (dialogue-oriented consultation), 13 proposals were worked out how the Australian government can be improved. This citizens' parliament was organized by the Australian newDemocracy Foundation, a non-party research and development organization.

Ireland : Since 2014, so-called “citizen democracy experiments” have been taking place in Dublin in the form of citizens' assemblies (99 citizens drawn for one year), which also take up nationwide topics, such as the future of pensions or the legalization of gay marriage . This referendum led to a referendum and thus to a higher acceptance among the Irish citizens.

Iceland : One of the most ambitious democracy experiments, namely a reform of the current Icelandic constitution from 1944, was brought down in 2008 after the government was overthrown (due to the financial crisis) by the left-wing successor government despite election promises . The 300,000 or more Icelanders elected a constitutional convention of 25 representatives from among their number , who worked out a draft constitution by consensus. All meetings could be followed live on the internet. The government's rejection was argued that a constitutional reform can only take place in the existing channels of constitutional law and therefore must be decided by parliament (not by the citizens), which has not yet been implemented.

Possible critical points with increased public participation

  • Since citizens' parliaments represent a more active form of co-determination, they also place higher demands on the participants, which raises problems similar to those of lay judges.
  • The opportunity to participate must be given to all citizens, including those who, for example, do not have access to the Internet. This poses logistical problems.
  • Discussions depend on moderators and therefore on their competence and neutrality.

Web links

Extract of thematically concerned institutions:

Germany

Austria

Switzerland

Individual evidence

  1. ^ Philippe Narval (managing director "European Forum Alpbach"): A plea for the renewal of democracy , Molden Verlag, 2018, ISBN 978-3-222-15012-8
  2. ^ Colin Crouch : Postdemokratie , Suhrkamp Verlag, 2008, ISBN 978-3-518-12540-3
  3. ↑ SurveyMonkey website: Calculating the number of respondents required . Accessed May 31, 2019
  4. ↑ INWT Statistics website, Berlin (D): Representativeness - Part 3: What role does the sample size play? . Accessed May 31, 2019
  5. ↑ David Van Reybrouck : Against Elections - Why Voting Is Not Democratic , Wallstein Verlag, 2016, ISBN 978-3-8353-1871-7
  6. ↑ Hubertus Buchstein : Democracy and Lottery , Campus Verlag, 2009, ISBN 978-3-593-38729-1
  7. ↑ Youtube video: "Summary 1 BP from 09.09.2017" , accessed on July 21, 2019
  8. ↑ Website Bayerischer Rundfunk: Democracy Experiment by lottery , accessed on June 20, 2019
  9. ↑ Website Westdeutscher Rundfunk Köln: Solution: The lottery procedure , accessed on June 20, 2019
  10. ^ Website Constitutions of the World: Constitutions of Iceland , accessed June 20, 2019
  11. ↑ Website Max Steinbeis Verfassungsblog GmbH., Berlin (D): Iceland's constitutional experiment practically failed , accessed on June 20, 2019