European Parliament, Democratic Legitimacy and the EU
Introduction

Background

The EU has three legislative aspects—the supranational aspect (the Commission), the intergovernmental aspect (the European Council and the Council of the EU), and the parliamentary aspects (the EP). Yet, only one of these bodies is directly elected in a democratic fashion (the EP), which means that the overwhelming majority of the EU’s legislative totality is specifically non-democratic in character. In other words, the only way the people of Europe can directly and democratically influence the shaping of EU policy is through the EP. This is undoubtedly why, as Ronald Holzhacker points out, “scholars, politicians and the public have bemoaned a lack of democratic legitimacy in the European Union (EU) for decades.”[footnoteRef:2] [2: Ronald Holzhacker, "Democratic legitimacy and the European Union." European Integration 29, no. 3 (2007), 257.]

The Central Question

The question this essay aims to answer is: To what extent does the European Parliament (EP) provide democratic legitimacy to the European Union?

Key Terms

Democratic legitimacy is defined as “citizen orientations toward the main principles of the political regime or the entire political system (i.e., democracy and not a particular administration, needs to be perceived as the best form of government or at least as the least evil).”[footnoteRef:3] In terms of the EU, democratic legitimacy refers to the character of the EU being democratic and representational of the will of the European people rather than as the will of a select group of individuals in powerful governmental positions who are not selected by European citizens. [3: Jorge Aragon, Political Legitimacy and Democracy, https://www.luc.edu/media/lucedu/dccirp/pdfs/articlesforresourc/Article_-_Aragon_Trelles,_Jorge_2.pdf]

Purpose

This paper argues that the EP provides democratic legitimacy to the European Union mostly aspirationally and in theory: it is designed as and resembles an authentic democratic body and foil to the (unelected) majority of the EU governance structure; but as the EP holds insufficient power, and inadequately displays its democratic credentials to the people of Europe, it serves as a hollow institution in practice. This paper will explain the lack of democratic legitimacy in the EU by using Holzhacker and other theorists to explain how the EP works, comparing the EP to the UK’s parliament, and discussing the issue of legitimacy from both sides of the aisle—the side that says, yes, the EP does increase democratic legitimacy in the EU; and the side that argues that in spite of the increase, it does not do enough to put power in the hands of the people.

Argument

In a legitimate democracy, those in power are accountable to the people: “government of the people, by the people, for the people” is the way the Lincoln phrased it.[footnoteRef:4] Hage and Kaeding note that democratic legitimacy “can be assessed through a number of criteria.”[footnoteRef:5] Among the main principles of democratic theory are “the representativeness and accountability of political decision makers.”[footnoteRef:6] At the same time, legitimacy can be determined by the ends and not just the means—i.e., by the output of the political system. If the end of democracy is to ensure a set of features well-regarded among modern society as being characterized by freedom, security, equality and so on, one could argue that who makes legislative decisions is less important than the outcome of those decisions and whether or not they align with the features that modern society seeks to have established in its culture.[footnoteRef:7] However, the specific character of democratic legitimacy is the way in which power is distributed—and that character is dependent upon the people having a voice in selecting their leaders or representatives and in shaping directly the laws that will be used to govern them.[footnoteRef:8] [4: Abraham Lincoln, “Gettysburg Address,” 1863. http://rmc.library.cornell.edu/gettysburg/good_cause/transcript.htm] [5: Frank Hage and Michael Kaeding, “Reconsidering the European Parliament’s legislative influence: Formal vs. informal procedures." European Integration 29, no. 3 (2007), 341.] [6: Frank Hage and Michael Kaeding, “Reconsidering the European Parliament’s legislative influence: Formal vs. informal procedures." European Integration 29, no. 3 (2007), 341.] [7: Frank Hage and Michael Kaeding, “Reconsidering the European Parliament’s legislative influence: Formal vs. informal procedures." European Integration 29, no. 3 (2007), 342.] [8: Ronald Holzhacker, "Democratic legitimacy and the European Union." European Integration 29, no. 3 (2007), 260.]

The EP falls into this definition rather poorly. It is largely impotent in terms of real power and gives more the impression of democracy than a legitimate reflection...…tend to vote the will of the established power structure while the unelected officials tend to be more challenging to the power structure. In either case, it is unclear whether the will of Englanders is actually represented.

The EP is like the House of Commons, which genuinely relies on democratic support/ mandate, but is relatively weak in challenging the government. Indeed, the EP has attempted in recent years (from 2014) to acquire the same level of power that the democratically legitimate House of Commons has, i.e. to make, or unmake, an Executive.

The “Spitzenkandidaten” concept is crucial to achieving this, where elected representatives choose who is really in charge. They still have no power to vote out a Commission, but they do have the power to advise on who the president should be.

Conclusion

Is the EU more democratically legitimate as the result of the EP? Its existence clearly increases the democratic legitimacy of the EU, certainly more so than the European Assembly which preceded it. But it does not necessarily follow that an increase in powers in the EP increases the democratic legitimacy of the EU—and expecting perceived legitimacy to increase will require much better engagement between MEPs and European institutions in general, and the people.  True democratic legitimacy is difficult to find anywhere in the world. The UK is a mixed-bag; and even the U.S. has succumbed to bureaucratic heft, which bogs down the ability of the people to truly hold their officials accountable, as a “deep state” (i.e., a continuation of unelected officials from one administration to the next) maintains a foothold within the power structure. In the EU, the EP gives the impression of democracy—but the foothold of power is wielded by a European “deep state”—and that is what makes all the difference. Understanding this “deep state” and its role in European government is where this topic should be explored in more detail. As The Economist has pointed out, “European elections will neither lend new credibility to the European Parliament nor give the European Union greater democratic legitimacy.”[footnoteRef:14] The reason is that the players deep within the state will nonetheless retain their…