‘Democracy without Politics’ in the European Commission's Response to Democratic Backsliding: From Technocratic Legalism to Democratic Pluralism

Abstract

The debate on EU responses to democratic backsliding in EU member states has mostly been anchored on technocratic appeals to the rule of law and judicial independence, and on Poland and Hungary. In this article, we ask: What understandings of democracy have shaped the European Commission's response to democratic backsliding in recent years? After developing an understanding of pluralist democracy, we uncover the way in which the European Commission conceives of democracy through a discourse analysis of European Commissioners' speeches (2018-21) and a normative-theoretical analysis. We identify the Commission's conception as a form of 'democracy without politics', and argue that it matches the EU's policy choices in regard to democratic backsliding. We argue that a fuller, healthier and normatively more attractive conception of democracy encompasses more attention to political pluralism, agonistic contestation and the vibrancy of civil society.

Fundamental Change Beneath the Surface: The Supranationalisation of Rule of Law Protection in the European Union

“…First, the Commission has often drawn parallels to the ‘Haider affair’ of 2000/2001, when bilateral sanctions against Austria failed (Merlingen et al, 2001); therefore, it opted for dialogue instead of sanctions, at least initially. Second, it has been careful to present itself as a nonpolitical actor, thereby adopting a technocratic and legalistic discourse with regard to rule of law protection (Oleart and Theuns, 2022). Third, and most importantly, the Commission was initially constrained by the lack of Council support needed to establish coercive rule of law tools (Closa, 2019).…”

“…We contribute to the literature on the EU's rule of law protection in two ways. First, although there is a considerable body of research on individual rule of law instruments (e.g., Batory, 2016; Bugarič, 2016; Halmai, 2019), the EU institution's individual approaches (Oleart and Theuns, 2022; Oliver and Stefanelli, 2016) and the technical and judicial intricacies of EU rule of law enforcement (Blauberger and Kelemen, 2016), the full picture is still missing. By analysing developments concerning the protection of the rule of law since 2010, we adopt a bird's‐eye view that allows us to detect underlying dynamics previously overlooked.…”

Saving Popular Sovereignty From a Slow Death in the European Union

“…A focus on particular issues might miss these broader developments. In comparison, deliberative democratic bodies are able to consider Europe's internal diversity and multiple processes of backsliding holistically when making political judgement on the threshold between diversity and decline (Oleart and Theuns, 2023) and thus combine a democratic mandate with a more appropriate approach. Unelected bodies can play important roles as impartial actors in the advisory and enforcement phase, but they should not be decision‐makers.…”