İrlanda’da Gerçekleştirilen Avrupa Birliği Vatandaş diyalogları: Müzakereci Demokrasi Perspektifinden Politik Bir Analiz

Öz

Geç modern dönemin yaygın karar alma formu olan temsili demokrasinin bir kriz içerisinde olduğu akademik literatürde sıklıkla iddia edilmektedir. Bu krizin bir benzerinin Avrupa Birliği (AB)’nin karar alma süreçleri için de geçerli olduğu savunulmaktadır. Bu kriz, hem pratikte hem de AB üzerine gelişen akademik literatürde demokrasi açığı olarak adlandırılmaktadır. Bu krize yönelik çözüm önerilerinin başında ise müzakereci demokrasi gelmektedir. Meşruiyetin kaynağını bizzat müzakerenin kendisinde gören müzakereci demokrasi, AB’de yaşanan demokrasi açığının nedenlerini oluşturan temsil, katılım ve meşruiyet krizlerine çözüm olarak sunulmaktadır. Bu çerçevede AB, kurumsal boyutta pek çok müzakereci demokrasi pratiğini hayata geçirmiştir. Bu uygulamalardan en önemlilerinden birisi ise vatandaş diyaloglarıdır. Bu çalışmada, AB’nin vatandaş diyaloglarının niteliği müzakereci demokrasinin teorik ve normatif varsayımları çerçevesinde İrlanda örneği üzerinden analiz edilmiştir. Çalışmanın ana argümanı, İrlanda örneğinden yola çıkılarak vatandaş diyaloglarının, AB’deki demokrasi açığını aşmaya ve AB’nin demokratik meşruiyetini güçlendirmeye yönelik önemli bir uygulama olduğu, ancak geliştirilmeye açık yönleri bulunduğudur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Uluslararası siyaset
• Avrupa Birliği
• temsili demokrasi krizi
• demokrasi açığı
• müzakereci demokrasi
• vatandaş diyalogları.

Citizens’ Dialogues of the European Union in Ireland: A Political Analysis from the Perspective of Deliberative Democracy

Öz

It is frequently claimed in the scholarly literature that representative democracy, which is the prevalent decision-making form of the late modern period, is in a crisis. It is argued that a similar crisis is also valid for the decision-making processes of the European Union (EU). This crisis is called the democratic deficit both in practice and in the growing scholarly literature on the EU. One of the crucial remedy proposals for this crisis is deliberative democracy. Deliberative democracy, which regards the source of legitimacy in the deliberation itself, is provided as a remedy for the democratic deficit in the EU rooted in representation, participation, and legitimacy crises. Within this framework, the EU has implemented a great number of deliberative democracy practices at the institutional level. One of the most significant of these practices is citizens’ dialogues. In this study, the effectiveness of the EU’s citizen dialogues is analyzed in the case of Ireland with reference to the theoretical and normative assumptions of deliberative democracy. The main argument raised in this study is that citizens’ dialogues are of crucial importance for overcoming the democracy deficit in the EU and for strengthening its democratic legitimacy, but there is still room for improvement.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• International politics
• European Union
• the crisis of representative democracy
• the democracy deficit
• deliberative democracy
• citizens’ dialogues

Kaynakça

1. Akdemir, E. (2019). Avrupa Birliği Ülkelerinde Siyasal Katılım Platformları: Rolleri ve Amaçları. Ankara: Siyasal Kitabevi.
2. Akgül Açıkmeşe, S. (2003). Avrupa Birliği’nde demokratik meşruiyet sorunu. Ankara Avrupa Çalışmaları Dergisi, 2(4), 23-45.
3. Alkan, Y. S. (2015). Facilitative secularism: The place of religious arguments in public political debate (Doktora tezi). Akdeniz Üniversitesi SBE, Erişim adresi: https://leicester.figshare.com/articles/Facilitative_secularism_the_place_of_religious_arguments_in_public_political_debate/10142606/1
4. Alkan, Y. S. (2018). Gizli demokrasi: temsili demokrasi krizi ve doğrudan demokrasi talebi arasındaki ilişkiye yönelik bir görüş. Akdeniz İİBF Dergisi, 18, 23-43.
5. Alonso, S., Keane, J. ve Merkel, W. (Der.). (2011). The Future of Representative Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
6. Altman, D. (2011). Direct Democracy Worldwide. New York: Cambridge University Press.
7. Alujevic, L. V. ve Nacarino, R. (2012). The EU and its democratic deficit problems and possible solutions. European View, 11(1), 63-70.
8. Ateşok, Z. Ö. ve Özer Yürür, Y. Y. (2020). Avrupa Birliği Komisyonu: Lizbon Antlaşması sonrası değişiklikler. D. Saygın ve S. Bardakçı Tosun (Der.). Güncel Gelişmeler Kapsamında Avrupa Birliği ve Demokrasi Demokratik Meşruiyet Tartışmaları içinde (ss. 231-257). Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.

9. Bächtiger A., Dryzek J. S., Mansbridge J. ve Warren M. E. (2018). The Oxford Handbook of Deliberative Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
10. Barabas, J. (2004). How deliberation affects policy outcomes. The American Political Science Review, 98(4), 687-701.
11. Barber, B. R. (1984). Strong Democracy: Participatory Politics for A New Age. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
12. Baykal, S. (2004). Avrupa Birliği’nin geleceği: meşruiyet sorunu, anayasallaşma süreci ve bütünleşmenin nihai hedefi üzerine. Uluslararası İlişkiler Dergisi, 1(1), 119-153.
13. Bengtsson, A. ve Mattila, M. (2009). Direct democracy and its critics: support for direct democracy and “stealth” democracy in Finland. West European Politics, 32(5), 1031-1048.
14. Benhabib, S. (Ed.). (1996). Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
15. Białożyt W. ve Quiniou, R. (2020). Europe’s deliberative instruments: Has the EU delivered? S. Blockmans ve S. Russack (Ed.) Deliberative Democracy in the EU Countering Populism with Participation and Debate içinde (ss. 313-332), CEPS, Londra: Rowman & Littlefield International.
16. Bohman, J. (1998). Survey article: the coming of age of deliberative democracy. The Journal of Political Philosophy, 6(4), 400-425.
17. Bonotti, M. (2011). Religious political parties and the limits of political liberalism. Res Publica, 17(2), 107-123.
18. Bowler, S. Donovan, T. ve Karp, J. A. (2007). Enraged or engaged? Preferences for direct citizen participation in affluent democracies. Political Research Quarterly, 60(3), 351–362.
19. Butcher, P ve Stratulat, C. (2019). Citizens expect: Lessons from European citizens’ consultations. Discussion Paper, European Policy Centre. Erişim adresi: https://www.epc.eu/content/PDF/2019/190521_LessonsECCs_CSPB.pdf
20. Butler D. ve Ranney A. (Der.). (1994). Referendums Around the World: The Growing Use of Direct Democracy. Washington: The AEI Press.
21. Chambers, S. (2003). Deliberative democratic theory. Annual Review of Political Science, 6, 307-326.
22. Cıngı, M. C. (2007). Sosyo-Politik Bir Analizle Avrupa Birliği’nin Demokratik Eksiklikleri. İstanbul: Alfa Aktüel.
23. Citizens’ Dialogues. (2021), erişim adresi: https://ec.europa.eu/info/events/citizens-dialogues_en Consolidated Versions of the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. (2007, 13 Aralık), erişim adresi: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:12012M/TXT&from=EN
24. Cooke, M. (2017). Five arguments for deliberative democracy. D’entreves, M. (Der.) Democracy as Public Deliberation içinde (ss. 53-87). Oxon ve New York: Routledge.
25. Costello, A. (2021). Meaningful, but effective? A critical evaluation of Ireland’s citizens’ dialogues on the future of Europe. Politics, 41,1-16.
26. Craig, S., Kreppel, A. ve Kane, J. (2001). Public opinion and support for direct democracy: A grassroots perspective. M. Mendelsohn ve A. Parkin (Der.) Referendum Democracy: Citizens, Elites and Deliberation in Referendum Campaigns içinde (ss. 25- 46). New York: Palgrave.
27. Curato, N. ve Böker, M. (2016). Linking mini publics to the deliberative system: A research agenda. Political Science, 49, 173–190.
28. Dalton, R. J. (1984). Cognitive mobilization and partisan dealignment in advanced industrial democracies. Journal of Politics , 46(1), 264-284.
29. Dalton, R. J., Burklin W. P. ve Drummond, A. (2001). Public opinion and direct democracy. Journal of Democracy, 12(4), 141-153.
30. Dalton, R. J. (2004). Democratic Challenges, Democratic Choices The Erosion Of Political Support in Advanced Democracies. New York: Oxford University Press.
31. Dalton, R. J. (2007). Partisan mobilization, cognitive mobilization and the changing American electorate. Electoral Studies, 26(2), 274-286.
32. Dalton, R. J. (2008). Citizen Politics: Public Opinion And Political Parties in Advanced Industrial Democracies. Washington DC: CQ Press.
33. Dalton, R. J. ve Scarrow, S. E. (Der.). (2003). Democracy Transformed? Expanding Political Opportunities in Advanced Industrial Democracies. New York: Oxford University Press.
34. Decker, F. (2002). Governance beyond the nation state: Reflections on the democratic deficit of the EU. Journal of European Public Policy, 9(2): 256-272.
35. Demir, N. (2007). Avrupa Birliği’nde Demokrasi. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
36. Donovan, T. ve Karp, J. A. (2006). Popular support for direct democracy. Party Politics, 12(5), 671-688.
37. Downs, A. (1957). An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper and Row.
38. Dryzek, J. S. (1990). Discursive Democracy: Politics, Policy and Political Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
39. Dryzek, J. S. (2000). Deliberative Democracy and Beyond: Liberals, Critics, Contestations. New York: Oxford University Press.
40. Dryzek, J. S. (2001). Legitimacy and economy in deliberative democracy. Political Theory, 29(5), 651-669.
41. Eisenach, E. (2000). The Next Religious Establishment: National Identity and Political Theology in Post-Protestant America. Lanham, MD: Rowman&Littlefield.
42. European Commission. (2017). White paper on the future of Europe: Reflections and scenarios for the EU27 by 2025, erişim adresi: https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/ba81f70e-2b10-11e7-9412-01aa75ed71a1/language-en
43. European Commission. (2018, Aralık), Citizens’ dialogues and citizens’ consultations, progress report, erişim adresi: https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files/eu-progress-report-consultations-111218_en.pdf
44. European Commission. (2019, Nisan), Citizens’ dialogues and citizens’ consultation – key conclusions, erişim adresi: https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files/euco-sibiu-citizensdialogues_en.pdf
45. European Parliament. (2021). European election results - 2019 - European Union, erişim adresi: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/about-parliament/en/in-the-past/previous-elections.
46. Farrell, D. M., Suiter, J. ve Harris, C. (2019). “Systematising” constitutional deliberation: The 2016-2018 citizens’ assembly in Ireland. Irish Political Studies, 31(4): 113-123.
47. Fishkin, J. (1991). Democracy and Deliberation: New Directions for Democratic Reform. New York: Yale University Press.
48. Fishkin, J. (2005). Defending deliberation. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 8(1), 71-78.
49. Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung. (2018). The Other Democratic Deficit: A Toolbox for EU to Safeguard Democracy in Member State. Berlin: Department for Central and Eastern Europe, erişim adresi: https://library.fes.de/pdf-files/id-moe/14371-20180622.pdf.
50. Fung, A. (2006). Varieties of participation in complex governance. Public Administration Review, 66, 66-75.
51. Fung, A. (2015). Putting the public back into governance: The challenges of citizen participation and its future. Public Administration Review, 75(4), 513-522.
52. Gallagher, M. ve Uleri, P. U. (1996). The Referendum Experience in Europe. London: MacMillan Press.
53. Gastil, J. ve Richards, R. (2013). Making direct democracy deliberative through random assemblies. Politics and Society, 41(2), 253–81.
54. Gerret, E. (1997). Who directs direct democracy. University of Chicago Law School Roundtable, 4(1), 17-36.
55. Gerwin, M. (2018). Citizens’ Assemblies: A Guide to Democracy That Works. Krakow: Open Plan Foundation.
56. Gherghina, S. (2017). Direct democracy and subjective regime legitimacy in europe. Democratization, 24(4), 613-631.
57. Gould, C. (1996). Diversity and democracy: Representing difference. S. Benhabib (Der.) Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of The Political içinde (ss. 171-186). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
58. Gray, M. ve Caul, M. (2000). Declining voter turnout in advanced industrial democracies, 1950 to 1997: the effects of declining group mobilization. Comparative Political Studies, 33(9), 1091-1122.
59. Gutmann, A. (1994). Multiculturalism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
60. Gutmann, A. ve Thompson, D. (1990). Moral conflict and political consensus. Ethics, 101(1), 64-88.
61. Gutmann, A. ve Thompson, D. (1996). Democracy and Disagreement. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
62. Gutmann, A. ve Thompson, D. (2002). Deliberative democracy beyond process. Journal of Political Philosophy, 10, 153-174.
63. Gutmann, A. ve Thompson, D. (2004). Why Deliberative Democracy? Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
64. Habermas, J. (1996). Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy, çev. William Rehg. Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
65. Habermas, J. (1989). The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere. Massachusetts: MIT Press.
66. Habermas, J. (1998). The Inclusion of the Other: Studies in Political Theory. Massachusetts: MIT Press.
67. Habermas, J. (2015). Democracy in Europe: Why the development of the EU into a transnational democracy is necessary and how ıt is possible. European Law Journal, 21(4), 546-557.
68. Harris, C. ve Schön-Quinlivan, E. (2010). The role for deliberative processes in ınforming and engaging women on the EU: A case study of a deliberative conference on Irish women’s voices on Europe. PSAI Annual Conference, Dublin, Ireland.
69. Hartz-Karp, J. ve Briand, M. K. (2009). Institutionalising deliberative democracy: Theoretical and practical challenges, Australasian Parliamentary Review, 24(1), 167-198.
70. Hendriks, C. M. (2006). Integrating deliberation: Reconciling civil society’s dual role in a deliberative democracy. Political Studies, 54(3), 486-508.
71. Héritier, A. (2003). Composite democracy in Europe: The role of transperancy and access to ınformation. Journal of European Public Policy, 10(5), 814-833.
72. Hix, S. (2008). What’s Wrong with the European Union and How to Fix It. Cambridge: Polity Press.
73. Hobolt, S. B. (2014). A vote for the president? The role of Spitzenkandidaten in the 2014 European Parliament elections. Journal of European Public Policy, 21(10), 1528-1540.
74. Hobolt, S. B., Hoyland, B. ve Hix, S. (2019). Career ambitions and legislative participation: the moderating effect of electoral ınstitutions. British Journal of Political Science. 49(2): 491–512.
75. Hurmi, B. (2008). Avrupa Birliği ve demokrasi açığı sorunu. R. Ö. Dönmez ve G. Telatar (Der.). Küreselleşen Dünyada Avrupa Birliği içinde (ss. 36-80). Ankara: Phoenix Yayınları.
76. Inglehart, R. (1977). Silent Revolution: Changing Values and Political Styles Among Western Publics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
77. Inglehart, R. (1990). Culture Shift in Advanced Industrial Society. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
78. Inglehart, R. ve Welzel, C. (2005). Modernization, Cultural Change and Democracy: The Human Development Sequence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
79. Kılıç, K. B. (2021). Temsili Demokrasi Krizine Çözüm Olarak Katılımcı Demokrasi Uygulamalarının Uluslarüstü Düzeyde İncelenmesi: Avrupa Birliği Örneği. Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Akdeniz Üniversitesi (internet erişimi yok).
80. Knopff, R. (1998). Populism and the politics of rights: The dual attack on representative democracy. Canadian Journal of Political Science, 31(4), 683-705.
81. Kuyper, J. ve Wolkenstein, F. (2019). Complementing and correcting representative institutions: When and how to use mini publics. European Journal of Political Research, 58(2), 656-675.
82. Kymlicka, W. (1996). Multicultural Citizenship: A Liberal Theory of Minority Rights. Oxford : Clarendon Press.
83. Macedo, S. (1999). Deliberative Politics Essays on Democracy and Disagreement. New York: Oxford University Press.
84. Majone, G. (2014). From the democratic deficit to a democratic default? The normative dimension of the Euro crisis. G. Majone (Der.). Rethinking The Union Of Europe Post-Crisis: Has Integration Gone Too Far? içinde (ss. 179-207). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
85. Mansbridge J., Bohman, J., Chambers, S. v.d.. (2010). The place of self-interest and the role of power in deliberative democracy. Journal of Political Philosophy, 18(1), 64-100.
86. Menendez, A.J. (2013). The existential crisis of the European Union. German Law Journal, 14(5), 453-526.
87. Meyer, C. (1999). Political legitimacy and the invisibility of politics: Exploring the European Union’s communication deficit. Journal of Common Market Studies, 37(4), 617-639.
88. Morel, L. ve Qvortrup, M. (2017). The Routledge Handbook to Referendums and Direct Democracy. Londra: Routledge.
89. Mouffe, C. (2000). Deliberative democracy or agonistic pluralism. Political Science Series, No. 72, 1-17.
90. Norrıs, P. (Der.). (1999). Critical Citizens: Global Support For Democratic Governance. New York: Oxford University Press.
91. Özekmekçi, M. İ. (2020). Bir siyasal sistem olarak Avrupa Birliği’nde demokratik meşruiyet sorunu ve Avrupa Parlamentosu. D. Saygın ve S. Bardakçı Tosun (Der.). Güncel Gelişmeler Kapsamında Avrupa Birliği ve Demokrasi Demokratik Meşruiyet Tartışmaları içinde (ss. 169-207). Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
92. Parekh, B. (2005). Rethinking Multiculturalism: Cultural Diversity and Political Theory. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
93. Pharr, S. J., Putnam R. D., ve Dalton, R. J. (2000). Trouble in the advanced democracies? A quarter-century of declining confidence. Journal of Democracy, 11(2), 5-25.
94. Philips, A. (2007). Multiculturalism without Culture. Princeton, NJ : Princeton University Press.
95. Pıtkın, H. F. (2004). Representation and democracy: uneasy alliance. Scandinavian Political Studies, 27(3), 335-342.
96. Pollak, J. ve Sigalas, E. (2012). Political parties at the European Level: Do they satisfy the condition of programmatic convergence?. S. Kröger ve D. Friedrich (Der.) The Challenge Of Democratic Representation in The European Union içinde (ss. 23-40). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
97. Renkamp, A. (2019). Evaluation of the cross-border EU citizens’ dialogue on May 17, 2019 in the Hague. The citizens’ dialogue was conducted by the European Commission in cooperation with the Bertelsmann Stiftung, erişim adresi: http://aei.pitt.edu/102563/1/Evaluation_EU-Citizens_Dialogue_TheHague.pdf
98. Russack, S. (2018). Pathways for citizens to engage in EU policymaking. CEPS Policy Insights, No. 14, erişim adresi: file:///C:/Users/HP/Downloads/PI2018_14_SR_2CU%20chapter%20on%20Pathways%20for%20Citizens%20to%20Engage%20in%20EU%20Policymaking.pdf
99. Russack, S. (2019). EU parliamentary democracy: How representative. Policy Insights. No. 7, erişim adresi: http://aei.pitt.edu/98656/1/PI2019_07_SR_EU-parliamentary-democracy-1.pdf
100. Ryfe, D. (2005). Does deliberative democracy work? Annual Review of Political Science, 8, 49-71.
101. Saward, M. (2003). Democracy. Cambridge: Polity Press.
102. Saygın, D. (2020). Avrupa Birliği Adalet Divanı’nda insan hakları ve demokrasi. D. Saygın ve S. Bardakçı Tosun (Der.). Güncel Gelişmeler Kapsamında Avrupa Birliği ve Demokrasi Demokratik Meşruiyet Tartışmaları içinde (259-274). Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
103. Schumpeter, J. A. (1976). Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. Londra ve New York: Routledge.
104. Shackleton, M. (1998). Democratic deficit. D. Dinan (Der.). Encyclopedia of the European Union içinde (130-134). London: Macmillan.
105. Smith, G. ve Wales, C. (2000). Citizens’ juries and deliberative democracy. Political Studies, 48(1), 51-65.
106. Suiter, J. Farrell, D. M. ve O’Malley, E. (2016). When do deliberative citizens change their opinions? Evidence from the Irish citizens’ assembly. International Political Science Review, 37(2), 198-212.
107. Thaler, M. (2009). From public reason to reasonable accommodation: Negotiating the place of religion in the public sphere. Diacritica, 23(2), 249-270.
108. Tormey, S. (2015). The End of Representative Politics. Cambridge: Polity Press.
109. Uhr, J. (1998). Deliberative Democracy in Australia: The Changing Place of Parliament. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
110. Ülger, İ. K. (2020). AB dış politikasının demokrasi açısından analizi. D. Saygın ve S. Bardakçı Tosun (Der.) Güncel Gelişmeler Kapsamında Avrupa Birliği ve Demokrasi Demokratik Meşruiyet Tartışmaları içinde (ss. 297-324). Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
111. Weale, A. (2007). Democracy. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
112. Wessels, W. ve Diedrichs, U. (1997). A new kind of legitimacy for a new kind of parliament: The evolution of the European Parliament. European Integration Online Papers, 1(6), 1-20.
113. Yiğit, D. (2009). The democratic deficit and the European transparency initiative. Ankara Avrupa Çalışmaları Dergisi, 8(2), 109-143.
114. Young, Y. (2000). Inclusion and Democracy. New York: Oxford University Press.
115. Youngs, R. (2019). Can citizen participation really revive European democracy. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, erişim adresi: https://carnegieendowment.org/files/7-8-19_Youngs_OGP.pdf