Revitalizing the ECI – improving the follow-up on successful initiatives

With the new regulation on the European Citizens’ Initiative coming into force on 1 January 2020, it is of crucial importance that European and national institutions do everything they can to make the relaunch of this EU participation instrument a success. In the recently published paper ‘Six ideas for rejuvenating European democracy’, my colleagues and I argued for a greater involvement of both the European and national parliaments in the European Citizens’ Initiative, in particular in the follow-up on successful initiatives. Find the full article here.

At present, the follow-up on successful initiatives primarily contains two events: the Commission invites the organisers for a private meeting to exchange on the initiative and its objectives, and the European Parliament organises a public hearing that enables organisers to present their initiative publicly and to engage in a discussion with EU policy-makers.

The new regulation extends the period for the Commission to examine citizens’ initiatives that have been successful at collecting the necessary signatures from currently three to six months. This greatly increases the opportunities for consultation, debate and awareness-raising before the Commission gives the ‘final word’ on whether or not it follows up on citizens’ demands.

While this increased examination period has the potential to make initiative organisers and supporters feel more heard and taken seriously in their initiative – which is a precondition for a successful participation instrument – the big question is whether this opportunity is made use of. This is a joint responsibility of all EU and national institutions involved.

The European Commission can make proper use of the 6-month examination period by conducting both targeted and public consultations on the subject matter of the initiative. Additionally, it could facilitate the organisation of a panel of randomly selected EU citizens to review the initiatives’ objectives and give a recommendation to the Commission on how to follow up. This allows the Commission to find out whether the objectives pursued by the initiative are more widely supported by a cross-section of society.

The European Parliament’s role in the follow-up is equally important. In addition to the public hearing, the Parliament has recently changed its Rules of Procedure to ensure that future successful initiatives will be debated in plenary. This is a very welcome step, but it would be important for every such debate to be concluded with a plenary resolution. This allows citizens to know exactly where their elected representatives stand on the initiative’s subject matter, and it can help to inform the Commission’s decision.

Lastly, we also need to see a stronger engagement of the member states. In addition to the European Parliament, it would be very beneficial if national parliaments debate and vote on successful initiatives in their own chambers as well. Not only would this help to foster cross-border debate on the initiative, it would also put pressure on member state governments – represented in the EU’s other legislator, the Council – to take their responsibility in ensuring that successful initiatives are receiving the level of political consideration they deserve.