Institutionalising Citizen Deliberation in Parliament: The Permanent Citizens’ Dialogue in the German-speaking Community of Belgium

Abstract

In recent years, an increasing number of scholars and politicians have called for institutionalising deliberative citizen participation within Parliaments. The Parliament of the German-speaking Community of Belgium has paved the way in this direction by institutionalising a permanent deliberative citizen assembly that is directly linked to the parliamentary process. It consists in a permanent Citizens’ Council drawn by lot, which can initiate Citizens’ Assemblies, also drawn by lot, whose mission is to deliberate and formulate recommendations on the subject that the Citizens’ Council had submitted to them. At the end of the deliberations, the recommendations are discussed in a joint committee between the members of the Citizens’ Assembly, elected representatives and the minister in charge. The latter two then need to indicate whether and how the recommendations will be implemented by parliamentary or governmental measures—with rejections requiring specific justification. This article analyses how such a far-reaching process of citizen participation and deliberation became introduced at the core of the parliamentary institution and what are its features.

Outcomes of Democratic Innovations: Horizontalism as Inclusive Participation Spillover, but Fragile under Hierarchical Attacks

“…A product of horizontal processes proved, therefore, to be more resilient than horizontal processes themselves. This contrasts with findings highlighted in participatory studies, which stress the volatile nature of punctual outcomes and advocate for building more durable mechanisms and processes through institutional design, in order to enhance sustainable citizen participation (Niessen & Reuchamps, 2022;Peña-López, 2020;Mayka, 2019;Smith, 2009).…”

“…Most of the politicians come from wealthy social strata, having no background or intimate knowledge on wide ranges of problems encountered by low and middle income citizens, nor on the issues faced by a large variety of professional, cultural or ethnic communities. As there is historical evidence that unrepresented or under-represented groups tend to become socially invisible, diminished or vilified, and problems they encounter get worse over time, citizen assemblies count as democratic corrections aimed to mirror and complement traditional deliberative institutions (Niessen & Reuchamps, 2022). Methodological approaches in designing a citizen parliament vary upon the specific scope of each assembly and the accommodating political context.…”

Looking in from the Outside: How Do Invited But Not Selected Citizens Perceive the Legitimacy of a Minipublic?

“…One direction for future research is to analyse factors that could strengthen the link between the minipublic and its non-participants, whether these are invited but not selected citizens or members of the wider public. Developments in institutionalized forms of deliberative democracy such as the Ostbelgien Modell (Niessen & Reuchamps 2020) and the mixed parliamentary committees in Brussels and in Wallonia (Reuchamps 2020) are beginning to investigate these possibilities. Only then will we be able to grasp the levers of the possible connection between a minipublic, its results and the wider public.…”

More competent thus more legitimate? MPs’ discourses on deliberative mini-publics

“…Deliberative initiatives also emanated from state actors, such as the Parliaments of Wallonia or Brussels, and local municipalities. The Parliament of the German-speaking community of Belgium has created a permanent deliberative citizen assembly linked to the parliamentary process (Niessen and Reuchamps 2020). Both the Parliaments of Brussels and the Parliament of Wallonia voted for the implementation of mixed parliamentary committees with randomly selected citizens and elected MPs.…”