Suchergebnisse

For the longest time, the participation of civil society has not been an area of interest for neither EU researchers nor political decision-makers. This changed with a rising interest in the democratic credentials of the European Union. With the end of the initial permissive consensus on EU integration, civil society emerged as a possible remedy to bridge the gap between supranational governance and citizens. This Living Review presents the two dominant analytical perspectives on civil society participation: the notion of civil society as organized actors that contribute actively to multilevel governance, and civil society as the mold for an emerging European public sphere. Both these conceptual views are reflected in hands-on initiatives on the EU level. On the one hand, the European Commission in particular promotes the inclusion of organized societal interests in the informal decision-making procedures. On the other hand, various forms of deliberative practices have been introduced that build on the encompassing notion of constituting a trans-European public sphere. The review offers a comprehensive overview on the multiple definitions of civil society and the distinct role attributions these coexisting conceptions imply. The contribution draws a number of critical conclusions on the actual outcomes that the active promotion of civil society participation has thus achieved, and questions whether civil society participation has indeed led to a more grounded legitimacy of EU decisions or a more settled European public sphere. Adapted from the source document.

The debate on the European Union's legitimacy crisis led to the discovery of civil society in EU governance. With the waning of the permissive consensus, politicians, bureaucrats, and academics shifted their attention towards the input-oriented dimension of democratic legitimacy which results from authentic participation and governance 'by the people'. Participatory democracy via civil society involvement came to be considered as a promising supplement to representative democracy and entered EU documents such as the White Paper on European Governance and the draft Constitutional Treaty around the turn of the millennium. However, the origins of the current debate on civil society in EU governance can also be traced back to interest group research which has flourished since the early 1980s and the debate on 'participatory governance' that unfolded in the 1990s. These approaches are more concerned with effective political problem-solving and the output-dimension of democratic legitimacy which can, from this point of view, be improved by stakeholder participation and civil society engagement. In fact, two scholars who refer to 'civil society' do not necessarily mean the same thing and this is even less obvious if journalists, politicians or public officials allude to civil society. In order to enhance the basis of the discussion, we should seek to identify the conceptions they rely on. This will help us to understand where different arguments come from. Hence, this essay seeks to identify the different layers of the current debate on civil society participation in EU governance by unfolding the traditions of thought academic and political advocates of civil society in EU affairs currently draw on. This essay will basically distinguish between output-oriented approaches which explore the contribution of civil society groups to effective governance and problem-solving on the one hand and research that is interested in input-oriented legitimacy and participatory democracy on the other. Adapted from the source document.

Introductory: Civil Society, Participation, and Religion1

This article was (1) to examine the process of democratic governance carried out by Yogyakarta Legal Aid Institute through advocating the Erwiana case and (2) to find out the supporting and inhibiting factors in promoting democratic governance. This study is descriptive qualitative research. The informants were the director, head of the division, and members of Yogyakarta Legal Aid Institute and Erwiana as the beneficiary. Data collection techniques used non-participant observation, interviews, and documentation studies and followed with data sources triangulation to check its validity. The data analysis then applied an interactive model through data collection, data presentation, verification, and conclusions. The results showed that the Yogyakarta Legal Aid Institute's implementation of democratic governance in advocating law enforcement on the injustices experienced toward migrant workers was optimal. As an NGO, LBH has been able to bridge differences in legal policies between the two countries and efficient against diplomatic barriers. Its supporting factors are political development as mobilization and mass participation, collaboration with grassroots groups, donor support, and public policies that support case counseling. Simultaneously, the inhibiting factors are political will, intolerant group resistance, and lack of human resources.