Print
See related documents
Resolution 1744 (2010) Final version
Extra-institutional actors in the democratic system
1. The Parliamentary Assembly recalls
the Council of Europe’s key role in, and particular its responsibility for,
safeguarding and promoting pluralist democracy in Europe. The Organisation
must continue to follow closely new trends and anticipate tendencies
in the evolution of our societies in order to identify and remedy deficiencies
and to improve the quality of democracy which is of the greatest
value for all Europeans.
2. As already expressed in its previous resolutions, the Assembly
remains concerned by the declining level of public interest and
involvement in politics and by the loss of citizens’ confidence
in state and political institutions.
3. It notes, however, that traditional state and political institutions
– parliaments, governments, the judiciary, as well as political
parties – are not the sole participants in the democratic political
process. In modern democratic societies, there exists a variety
of other actors which do not stem from the traditional branches
of institutional power, but exert an influence on the process of
formation of those institutions and on the political decision-making
process therein.
4. Such extra-institutional actors may include trade unions,
constituted advisory bodies, the business community, interest and
pressure groups, advocacies, lobbies and networks of influence.
Furthermore, the media play an important part in the political process.
Civil society organisations (charities, non-profit or non-governmental
organisations, volunteer associations, etc.), as well as religious
organisations, often pursue political agendas and tend to influence
political decisions. Finally, attempts by groups involved in illegal activities
to exert influence on political decision making should not be underestimated.
5. In addition, the activities and decisions of various economic
operators (industries, banks, insurance companies, investment funds,
credit rating agencies, etc.) may have a strong impact on policies
and require a political response from institutional actors.
6. While the influence of extra-institutional actors on politics
is not a new phenomenon, both its scale and its visibility have
considerably increased in recent years, in particular with the spread
of information and communication technologies. The Assembly therefore
considers that the role of extra-institutional actors needs to be
better understood in terms of their impact on democratic institutions
and procedures, and taken into account in the efforts to strengthen
and improve democracy.
7. The Assembly strongly supports political pluralism as one
of the key principles of a genuine democracy. Therefore, it notes
that, under some conditions, the activities of extra-institutional
actors may be beneficial for the functioning of a democratic political
system in so far as these actors:
7.1. provide
a framework for individuals to associate among themselves and jointly
express views and defend their interests;
7.2. encourage wider participation in public life and provide
opportunities to engage in the political process;
7.3. offer a link between the people and the political institutions;
7.4. allow a better representation of specific interests and
needs, including those of minorities;
7.5. provide expert information in the field of their activity,
which is necessary for informed political decision making;
7.6. provide additional channels of public oversight over political
decisions.
8. At the same time, the Assembly believes that some aspects
of activities of extra-institutional actors aimed at influencing
political decision making may raise a number of concerns with regard
to the fundamental principles of democracy.
9. In particular, the legitimacy of extra-institutional actors
is often doubtful as their mandate does not stem from the whole
of society; their representativity is limited and difficult to assess.
At the same time, the real influence and authority of such actors
may extend far beyond their legitimacy and representativity.
10. The lack of transparency as regards the internal functioning
of extra-institutional actors and their relations with public institutions
and officials may cause suspicions of political corruption and further
damage the image of, and public confidence in, political institutions.
In addition, extra-institutional actors are not subject to any genuine
democratic accountability.
11. While seeking to influence political decisions in accordance
with sectoral interests which they represent, extra-institutional
actors aim to alter the balance of interests as it results from
normal political processes. Consequently, the will of the people
may be distorted, the principle of political equality of citizens
is endangered and public confidence in democratic decision making
may be damaged even further.
12. Although the media are not part of state institutions, they
are often referred to as the “fourth power” due to their influence
on public opinion and, as a consequence, on the political process.
Free pluralist media are one of the cornerstones of a democratic
society, in so far as they allow circulation of accurate information
which is needed for decision making.
13. At the same time, the media as an instrument of political
influence may be misused and abused when they serve to circulate
selective or biased information and misinformation in order to manipulate
public opinion or to pursue narrow party or private business interests.
14. In this respect, the Assembly reiterates its concerns, already
expressed in its Resolution
1547 (2007) on the state of human rights and democracy
in Europe, that the media in many cases tend functionally to replace political
parties by setting political agenda, monopolising political debate
and creating and choosing political leaders. Moreover, it considers
that the self-assumed role of ultimate judge which some media tend
to play may seriously damage the political process.
15. The Assembly believes that political and state institutions
should involve various extra-institutional actors and citizens more
actively in the decision-making process. However, in order to improve
public confidence in public institutions of government, and thus
strengthen democracy and the rule of law, the decision-making process
needs to be more transparent.
16. People have a democratic right to know those actors who have
access to government decision making for the purpose of influence.
All kinds of influence which are not exercised in full transparency
should be considered as being suspicious and harmful to democracy.
17. Accordingly, democratic institutions should reject any attempts
to influence political decisions which are made in a non-transparent
way.
18. The Assembly refers to its Recommendation 1908 (2010) on lobbying
in a democratic society (European Code of conduct on lobbying),
and reiterates the suggestions contained therein.
19. That said, it considers that the influence of extra-institutional
actors on political decision making needs further examination, including
in the framework of the Council of Europe’s Forum for the Future
of Democracy.
20. Consequently, the Assembly invites the European Commission
for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission) to study the issue,
in particular with regard to:
20.1. the
scale of the involvement of extra-institutional actors in the political
process in the Council of Europe member states, as well as at the
international level;
20.2. the impact of these actors on the functioning of democratic
institutions and on the legitimacy of the democratic political process;
20.3. the existing legal framework for such activities in the
Council of Europe member states and the appropriateness of taking
additional standard-setting measures at national and European levels.
21. The Assembly resolves to reconsider the issue of the role
of extra-institutional actors in the democratic system on the basis
of the findings of the Venice Commission.