Democratia Europaea

– Why should the European Parliament in Strasbourg be reinforced?

The democratic deficit of Europe will get worse if Europe becomes more centralised, as the proponents of the transfer of the European Parliament from Strasbourg to Brussels wish to do. As every country in Europe decentralises, there is no good reason why the European Union should destroy its existing decentralised structure, and go against the general movement of history. History teaches that concentrations of powers increase the risk of abuse of powers. That is why we want a clear separation of powers (as theorised by Baron Charles de Montesquieu in The Spirit of Laws of 1748), and strenghten each power where its is today. Concerning costs, taxpayers will save billions if the European Parliament works mostly in Strasbourg instead of in Brussels. So Strasbourg is not only the better option historically, culturally and symbolically as the incarnation of political reconciliation, but also politically for fundamental reasons of political philosophy and to avoid centralisation, and even financially.

The European Parliament must be in Strasbourg, because it increases both its political independence as well as the necessary decentralisation needed to reduce the gap which separates millions of Europeans from their institutions.

Europe will not have the moral legitimacy to be a strong entity in the world, and will not be able to become the first “ethical superpower’ in History if it pursues the traditional political model of centralising all power. In the long run, the only (and best) guarantee is that the citizens of Europe themselves understand why, and are convinced, that their interests and that democracy in Europe depends on political decentralisation, therefore on the keeping and reinforcement of the one and only seat of the European Parliament in Strasbourg.

Author :
Print