ESPAÑA: EB Insta a Impulsar una Ley de Participación en Bilbao

EB insta a impulsar una Ley de Participación y propone una campaña para desmontar "tergiversaciones" sobre la consulta

Dice que la sociedad debe poder "decidir su futuro en sentido amplio" y pide al nacionalismo que asuma "este reto" para resultar "creíble"

BILBAO, 28 Sep. (EUROPA PRESS) -
Fuente: http://www.europapress.es/nacional/noticia-eb-insta-impulsar-ley-participacion-propone-campana-desmontar-tergiversaciones-consulta-20080928114249.html

Ezker Batua-Berdeak instó hoy al resto de partidos a apostar, en sus programas electorales, por la aprobación de una Ley de Participación Ciudadana en la próxima legislatura. Asimismo, propuso la puesta en marcha de una campaña informativa que "contribuya a desmontar las tergiversaciones urdidas" por PSOE y PP en relación a la Ley de Consulta, y acusó a ambas formaciones de "presentar como verdades lo que son burdas mentiras".

En un acto con cargos públicos y militantes de la formación en Bilbao, su coordinador general, Javier Madrazo, hizo público un manifiesto, denominado 'Participar es tu derecho', dentro de la campaña a favor del impulso de la participación ciudadana que desarrollará durante las próximas semanas y que tiene como uno de sus ejes principales la promoción de una Ley de Participación Ciudadana.

En este documento, que consta de diez puntos, EB reitera su compromiso "inequívoco" con la participación ciudadana como "un ejercicio de profundización democrática". En este sentido, reivindica que, en una "democracia real", la ciudadanía debe ser "agente activo y protagonista" en los ámbitos políticos, económicos, sociales, culturales y de género.

En esta línea, insiste en que la convocatoria de "una consulta no vinculante para exigir a ETA el cese por y para siempre de la violencia, y reivindicar el inicio de un diálogo democrático sin exclusiones" constituye "un derecho legítimo" de la sociedad vasca.

En este sentido, afirma que, aunque acata la sentencia del Tribunal Constitucional sobre la Ley vasca de Consulta que "impide en la práctica llevar a cabo esta iniciativa", no comparte sus argumentos, que "obedecen a razones exclusivamente políticas y no tienen un fundamento jurídico sólido".

A su entender, "estamos ante una campaña política, jurídica y mediática que manipula y distorsiona el significado real de la consulta no vinculante" aprobada por el Parlamento vasco. De este modo, subrayó que "una consulta no vinculante no es un referéndum" y que esta iniciativa no es "rupturista, ni soberanista y mucho menos independentista" ya que, de lo contrario, EB "nunca la hubiera apoyado".

La formación que dirige Javier Madrazo denuncia "la hipocresía y el cinismo del Gobierno Zapatero y el PSOE", teniendo en cuenta que "en Cataluña y en Andalucía reconocen la competencia de las instituciones de ambas comunidades para convocar consultas populares, mientras que en Euskadi niegan este mismo derecho, reconocido en el artículo 9.2 del Estatuto de Autonomía de Gernika".

Asimismo, considera que, en el actual contexto de "recrudecimiento de la actividad terrorista" se hace "aún más necesario dar la voz" a la ciudadanía vasca para pedir a ETA su disolución "por y para siempre, y sin condiciones".

"¿Cabe mayor deslegitimación de la violencia, de quienes la practican y de quienes callan ante ella que ser conscientes en primera persona del rechazo que generan en la sociedad? ¿Por qué el Gobierno Zapatero y el PSOE pueden negociar con ETA, con atentados y sin ellos, y la ciudadanía, en cambio, no puede mostrarles su condena en una consulta no vinculante?", cuestiona.

Ante esta situación, Ezker Batua-Berdeak reivindica el derecho de la sociedad vasca a "plantar cara" a ETA en "todos los ámbitos de la vida pública". Según añade, "ha llegado el momento de expresar nuestro hartazgo ante la violencia y nuestro compromiso inequívoco con los derechos humanos de un modo rotundo".

ETA tiene que ser "plenamente consciente de que no representa a nadie y su única salida es su propia desaparición", afirma EB, que se muestra convencida de que, "si se celebrase una consulta no vinculante en este sentido, incluso la llamada izquierda abertzale mayoritariamente diría no a la violencia y sí al diálogo".

MODELO PROPIO

El manifiesto recoge además la apuesta por un modelo de democracia participativa "propio y diferenciado" que tome en consideración "la voluntad de la ciudadanía no sólo en el ámbito de la pacificación y la normalización política, sino en el conjunto de la actividad pública". En este sentido, insta a PNV, PSOE, PP, Eusko Alkartasuna y Aralar a incorporar a sus programas electorales una declaración expresa a favor de la aprobación de una Ley de Participación Ciudadana en la próxima legislatura que "regule y establezca mecanismos de democracia directa".

Ezker Batua-Berdeak censura "las posiciones de quienes hacen bandera de la consulta no vinculante, pero después se oponen a iniciativas igualmente legítimas y democráticas como son conocer la opinión de la ciudadanía en relación con debates tan relevantes para nuestro futuro como el trazado del tren de alta velocidad, la instalación de incineradoras y centrales térmicas en nuestros pueblos y ciudades, o bien el desarrollo de nuevas infraestructuras".

En su opinión, la participación ciudadana "no se puede limitar" al rechazo a ETA y al compromiso con el diálogo democrático, sino que es preciso "confiar en la madurez" de la sociedad vasca para decidir su futuro "en un sentido amplio". "Y el nacionalismo ha de asumir este reto con convicción para que su apuesta por la participación ciudadana resulte creíble", reivindica.

Por otro lado, emplaza al PSOE a que "marque distancias" con el Partido Popular y "recupere, de una vez por todas, sus señas de identidad" porque "la izquierda no puede renunciar a la participación ciudadana como expresión de democracia real". En un contexto en el que "todos los países de nuestro entorno avanzan en políticas de participación ciudadana", EB estima que "no es comprensible ni razonable la negativa del PSOE y su alianza con el Partido Popular en contra de la democracia real", que en Euskadi es "una demanda social mayoritaria".

ADHESIÓN

Finalmente, Ezker Batua-Berdeak realiza un llamamiento a toda la ciudadanía vasca para que muestre su adhesión a todas las iniciativas políticas y sociales que se lleven a cabo en defensa de la participación ciudadana y aboga por la puesta en marcha de una campaña informativa que "contribuya a desmontar todas las tergiversaciones urdidas por el PSOE y el PP, que juegan a la confusión y a la manipulación, presentando como verdades lo que son burdas mentiras".

La formación de izquierdas apela al desarrollo de "un trabajo serio y profundo de pedagogía social para que la ciudadanía sepa que una consulta no vinculante no es un referéndum y que el Proyecto de Ley aprobado en la Parlamento vasco es legítimo, democrático y legal".

"Presentar esta iniciativa como un acto rupturista, soberanista o independentista no sólo es falso; constituye, además, un fraude y un engaño a la sociedad, con el único objetivo de negar e impedir en Euskadi que la ciudadanía puede decir a ETA que se disuelva por y para siempre, y al conjunto de partido políticos que la solución a nuestros problemas pasa necesariamente por el cese definitivo de la violencia y el diálogo democrático", concluye.

Philippines: Struggling with Direct Democracy

Valdehuesa: Ignorance makes ours a “bonsai” republic

By Manuel Valdehuesa
Monday, September 15, 2008
Street Talk
Source: http://www.sunstar.com.ph/static/cag/2008/09/15/oped/manuel.valdehuesa.street.talk.html

We’ve dealt with the barangay as a government, as a corporation, and as an economy. Anyone who doesn’t know why these three aspects are important or how each is supposed to be managed has no business demanding or preaching about good governance. And any official who doesn’t know how to make each one functional has no business staying in office.

What's your take on the Mindanao crisis? Discuss views with other readers

It’s been over a decade and a half since the Local Government Code of 1991 became law. It was meant 1) to correct the imbalance of power between the national and the local, 2) to lessen excessive centralization at the top, 3) to devolve what properly should be exercised by the intermediate and primary levels of government, and 4) to empower the community by giving the people an official role in overseeing its affairs.

But while the first three are substantially operative, the fourth and most important for the proper functioning of democracy – empowerment -- has been ignored. The people are still uninvolved, powerless, unable to participate in governance. Instead they are controlled and manipulated by the barangay chairman and his cohorts. And it’s all due to ignorance.

Ignorance about the barangay as a government -- with a direct democracy and a parliamentary form -- has turned it into an oligarchy of mostly incompetent officials that feed on its income. Ignorant chairmen not only trivialize the role of the people, they arrogate their power and govern the community arbitrarily, turning the kagawads and the sangguniang kabataan into puppets. Equally ignorant of their role, the citizens are mere spectators instead of actors in local governance. Even civil society seems clueless; they’re focused on the upper governments.

The legislative governing body called Barangay Assembly -- the local parliament consisting of all adult residents -- does not convene or hold deliberations. The people themselves are ignorant of their role in it. Failing to meet or decide collectively, the community cannot determine let alone express its collective will. It cannot form a consensus on anything. Voiceless, they are helpless, vulnerable to manipulation by the forces of corruption.

Worse, the leading citizens surrender the community’s fate to power-obsessed little trapos. They reinforce the barangay chairman’s thinking that he is a little president/commander-in-chief when in fact he is a little prime minister presiding over a parliamentary government -- with the people as members of parliament; as such they’re supposed to be the foil against abuse by the chairman. It is a non-performing government.

Ignorance about the barangay as a corporation makes it rely on subsidies, mainly on the internal revenue allotment (IRA) -- which the officials spend like an allowance instead of as capital for development. Clueless about the barangay’s corporate powers, they don’t organize enterprises to generate their own revenues. They do not enter into joint ventures with other barangays or tap private equity to capitalize enterprises including cooperatives, micro-lending or even a modest public utility like a water system, a shuttle service to and from the market, to and from the school, or wherever people need to be ferried. The idea of a subsidiary company to develop profitable opportunities is alien to them. They have overseas workers interested in ventures to create employment or income for those left behind, but there’s no initiative to do so. It’s a non-performing corporation.

As an economy, there is no attempt to explore the development of their land, labor or capital. They don’t inventory resources. Rural barangays don’t exploit opportunities offered by their nature-rich and exotic areas -- for ecotourism, recreation, adventure, or agribusiness. There are tropical beaches, lush forests, rolling plains, winding rivers, and underground wealth that are neglected. If at all, these are exploited by economic predators who strip their environment and leave nothing for future generations. Even their forest products and herbal goods are taken right under their noses to be exported or patented, depriving generations of their present and future value. It’s a non-performing economy.

Urban barangays neglect the production, marketing or financing possibilities in their own backyard. Entrepreneurs, craftsmen and assorted talents in their neighborhoods cry out to be discovered or supported but are ignored. Their fate is left to opportunists that trawl the community and strip it of its human and other resources.

Barangays form the base on which our republic’s politics and economics is built. But ignorance about the people’s role in it and the failure to develop it is making it a “bonsai” republic!

Ask Arturo Sanvictores, Ed Layug, Ruben Vegafria, or Hernan Agpawa why this is so! #

A former UN executive and director at the development academy of the Philippines, Manny heads the Gising Barangay Movement and writes Mondays, Wednesday, Fridays.

Direct Democracy in Taiwan and China

Taiwan needs change in parliamentary majority

By Dennis Engbarth
Taiwan News, Staff Writer
Page 4
2008-10-14 12:59 AM

Source: http://www.etaiwannews.com/etn/news_content.php?id=762247

A researcher in the development of referendums, initiatives and other methods of direct democracy since the 1970s, Professor Theo Schiller of the department of political science at Phillips University in Marburg, Germany, is chairman of the supervisory committee for the Initiative and Referendum Institute (IRI) - Europe.

After convening a major conference on "World Direct Democracy" in Aarau, Switzerland, Schiller discussed the potential and the problems of direct democracy methods for "democratizing democracy" in Europe and Asia, including Taiwan.

Q: Some proponents say that direct democracy can do everything that representative democracy does and does it better. Do you agree?

A: Representative democracy must provide the foundation for any democratic system. Direct democracy cannot replace representative democracy, but direct democracy methods can improve and supplement the political processes in representative democracies; and inject new life into representative systems by providing procedures which allow citizens to raise issues on decision-making agenda without the mediation of political parties through "popular initiatives" that may become referendums; or to settle an issue by a direct popular vote through referendum instead of parliamentary procedures. In representative democracies, there are always some areas that are overlooked or neglected so there is always a certain lack of responsiveness in representative systems. In these neglected areas of political life, direct democracy methods can help to articulate the interests of minorities or neglected groups of people, and such people can use direct democracy to push for improvements and innovations.

Q: Most European countries incorporate some forms of direct democracy, but is there any potential for the use of direct democracy at the EU level?

A: The European Union political system is not yet a complete representative democratic system, but a deficit or a secondary representative democracy that is far less representative than the systems of EU member countries. At present, we cannot see how the European political system can develop toward full-scale representative democracy and therefore there is even more need for direct democracy in Europe on the European level than in the individual national democracies. Ideally, we would need direct democracy on the European level in two forms. First, we need the right of popular or people's initiative and the institution of "optional referendum" through which EU citizens would be able to affirm or reject legislation on a EU level. However, at the current phase of political development in the EU, we will not get these rights. However, the proposed "European Citizen Initiative" which is contained in the proposed Treaty of Lisbon is a very first step. The ECI will be only a kind of "agenda initiative" through which one million people can put an initiative on the political agenda through their signatures on an initiative petition and is a very small first step to begin a development toward more direct democracy on the European level. I believe it is very important to get the Treaty of Lisbon, which has been stalled by its rejection by referendum in Ireland in June, ratified and the ECI implemented so that citizens in the EU will be able to use this first truly European transnational instrument of direct democracy.

Q: What lessons can we learn from the experience of the Swiss system of direct democracy?

A: Switzerland is a special case with a long history of direct democracy. In most other European countries and other parts of the world, we are still a long way from formulating the rules and to have the courage to give access to these methods of direct democracy not just to majorities or large minorities but also to small groups so they can initiate and put new issues on the agenda and stir up new debates and deliberations. And there must also be much time for discussions by citizens on initiatives or referendums in society because only on the basis of thorough discussion and debate can the quality of direct democracy methods be developed.

Q: What is your assessment of the prospects of direct democracy in the new democracies in Eastern Europe?

A: Instruments of direct democracy were introduced in Eastern Europe, especially in those countries which strived for independence such as the Baltic nations of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia as well as Slovakia and Slovenia. In connection with gaining independence, they had a concept that democratic transformation was a process of the whole nation and therefore they set the rules for using people's initiatives very high because they felt that initiatives or referendums should only be used by large majorities so as not to allow any small group the right of initiative. But this belief has proven to be wrong. These high thresholds now block the use of direct democracy instruments which cannot have any utility beyond consolidation of power. Unless these countries lower or eliminate unreasonable thresholds on petitions and turnout quorums, it will be impossible for direct democracy methods to realize their most important function, which is to give the right of people's initiative to minorities so that they can articulate neglected interests and values.

Q: What is your evaluation of the experience of Asian countries with direct democracy methods?

A: In a general way, the experience in most Asian countries has been similar to that of Eastern Europe, but in Asia, there are also several countries with rather authoritarian systems in which the transformation of the power structures has not even begun, including places like Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam, not to mention China or Burma. Other countries, such as Taiwan, South Korea and the Philippines, have instruments of direct democracy, but the context of the transformation of the whole power system has yet to be developed further.

Q: Does this pessimistic evaluation hold for Taiwan as well?

A: If you look at Taiwan comparatively in terms of democratic development, what is surely necessary is one or two changes in the parliamentary majority. So far, we have had two periods in which the president and the executive branch were controlled by a different party than the traditional power but in which the parliamentary majority did not change. What is very important is that there should be a change in the parliamentary majority because such a change in the parliamentary majority is a necessary condition for a genuine democratic transformation. In that period, it may be possible to deal with some issues in the reform of direct democracy and the current referendum law, but direct democracy may even be a factor bringing this process forward. However, changes of power in the Executive branch are not enough. Unless there is a change in the parliamentary majority, the democratic transformation will remain incomplete. However, it is clear that external factors and external relations can greatly influence the internal chances for such a transformation.

Q: Taiwan had two referenda together with the January legislative elections and the March presidential election that were nominally initiatives but promoted by the then governing Democratic Progressive Party. How do you evaluate their significance?

A: People's initiatives from the bottom that lead to referendums are in the last analysis more important than plebiscites or other referendums from the top down in securing democratic transformations. Even if referendums initiated by the people from the bottom up lose, they are very valuable as they activate participation of the citizens. Even if the two referendums earlier this year did not gain valid passage, they still have a legacy of having activated citizen participation and so they can contribute to the process of the development of democracy in Taiwan.

Q: What are the prospects for direct democracy in the People's Republic of China?

A: Before anything else, China needs to have guarantees of fundamental human and political rights and the rule of law and guarantees that citizens who are molested by the government or other authorities can gain redress in court. These conditions are not fulfilled in the PRC but if they do not exist, you cannot really begin to act politically as a free citizen. Until guarantees for the free expression of opinion, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly in public places, freedom of forming political associations and other basic rights are realized, there will be no room for having any meaningful democracy.

ARGENTINA: Encuentro Nacional de Presupuestos Participativos

PRESUPUESTOS PARTICIPATIVOS-CONVENIO

ANUNCIAN ENCUENTRO NACIONAL DE PRESUPUESTOS PARTICIPATIVOS

Política 21:08:00
Fuente: http://www.elpatagonico.net/index.php?item=viewlast&ref=ultimas&id=96106&sec=pol

Buenos Aires, 7 de octubre El Secretario de Relaciones Parlamentarias de la Jefatura de Gabinete de Ministros de la Nación, Oscar González, y el Intendente de la ciudad de La Plata, Pablo Bruera, suscribieron hoy un convenio de cooperación para organizar conjuntamente el "Primer Encuentro Nacional de Presupuestos Participativos", que se realizará en esa ciudad los días 12, 13 y 14 de diciembre próximo.

"Desde la Jefatura de Gabinete queremos aprovechar la excelente disposición del intendente Bruera para que funcionarios, dirigentes sociales y especialistas en Presupuesto Participativo socialicen experiencias y compartan ideas en torno a este instrumento tan importante de la democracia directa", dijo González.

"Precisamente -añadió- una de las misiones de la Secretaría de Relaciones Parlamentarias es fomentar el protagonismo popular mediante la implementación de estas nuevas herramientas de participación que acompañan y enriquecen los métodos tradicionales de la democracia representativa".

Por su parte, Bruera explicó que "este apoyo del Gobierno Nacional posibilitará que las diferentes ciudades del país, y algunas del exterior puedan venir a contar sus experiencias y mejorar la propuesta porque es muy importante seguir perfeccionándola".

En ese sentido, el intendente resaltó que "estamos en plena ejecución de los 35 proyectos elegidos en el mes de junio. Y para el congreso de diciembre ya estarán todas las obras terminadas. Además, antes de fin de año convocaremos a una nueva votación para ejecutarse en el 2009, con el doble de presupuesto para realizar obras".

"Este sistema además tiene el control de cada uno de los vecinos, porque cada uno de los proyectos fueron propuestos por ellos mismos y eso ayuda mucho a que nos enteremos si llega a haber una dificultad en su realización. Eso nos permitió que en muchos barrios podamos hacer también el segundo proyecto votado por lo vecinos", finalizó el Jefe Comunal.

La firma del convenio tuvo lugar en el Salón de Acuerdos municipal de La Plata, durante un acto del que también participaron entre otros Mario Rodríguez, Secretario General de la Municipalidad de La Plata, Carlos Sortino, Secretario del Consejo de Presupuesto Participativo platense y el responsable del programa de Presupuesto Participativo de la Secretaría de Relaciones Parlamentarias, Pablo Caruso.

ESPAÑA: VI Jornadas Internacionales de Presupuestos Participativos de Sevilla

VI JORNADAS INTERNACIONALES SOBRE PRESUPUESTOS PARTICIPATIVOS EN SEVILLA

HACIA LA CIUDADANÍA TOTAL: INCLUSIÓN SOCIAL Y PRESUPUESTOS PARTICIPATIVOS Del 5 al 8 de Noviembre de 2008
Fuente: http://www.presupuestosparticipativos.com/

Desde el inicio del presupuesto participativo en Sevilla hay un creciente interés por la participación de aquellos colectivos que han sido históricamente subrepresentados o excluidos de la toma de decisiones en lo público. Una necesidad de democratizar la vida de las ciudades ampliando la participación precisamente a aquellos sectores y colectivos apartados de la cosa pública como las mujeres, los inmigrantes, los mayores, los jóvenes, los discapacitados…

Ya hemos andado algo, pero nos falta mucho por hacer. Por eso estas VI Jornadas Internacionales de Presupuestos Participativos de Sevilla quiere reflexionar sobre esto, además de otras cuestiones, y para esto hemos invitado a personalidades, activistas e investigadores de otras partes del Mundo para que nos acompañen en esta labor de reflexión y profundización y nos ayuden en esta apuesta por la inclusión social. Y en este debate, tú tampoco puedes faltar. Participa.

VER TRÍPTICO:
sevilla.iepala.es/suelto/tripvijor.pdf

COLOMBIA: The Referendum that would Allow a Third Term for Uribe in 2010

In a recent post we featured a scheduled referendum in Colombia desiged to protect water rights. Another more contentious initiative that will be put on the ballot next year would amend the country's constitution in order to allow President Alvaro Uribe to run for a third consecutive term in 2010. When Hugo Chavez of Venezuela attempted to include a similar measure on term limits in a referendum package of constitutional reforms, he was widely criticized by his opponents as being an authoritarian dictator. Some are now levelling the same criticism at Alvaro Uribe of Colombia for his refusal to rule out a third term and denounce the referendum. - Editor

Colombia's Uribe eyes one more run

Enjoying great popularity after suppressing guerrilla violence, Colombia's president has declined to discourage a movement to let him run for a third term.

BY JOHN OTIS
Houston Chronicle
Source: http://www.miamiherald.com/news/world/latin-america-and-caribbean-politics/story/708316.html


BOGOTA -- Will he or won't he?

Halfway through his second term, Alvaro Uribe, Colombia's wildly popular president, remains coy about whether he will seek a third four-year term in 2010.

Earlier this month, he strongly hinted he would sit out the next election and perhaps attempt a comeback in 2014. Days later, Uribe said he might run in 2010 if his political allies failed to unite behind a single candidate who would continue his hard-line security policies.

Uribe has done nothing to stop a citizen-based drive to change the Colombian Constitution to allow him to run again. For the moment, the charter prohibits presidents from serving more than two terms.

But this month, the Colombian Congress received a petition with more than five million signatures obliging lawmakers to consider a referendum on eliminating the ban on third terms.

''People say that he's doing good work and, if that's the case, he should continue in the job,'' said Carlos Alberto Jaramillo, one of the organizers of the petition drive.

RIDING HIGH

Many analysts believe Uribe would win if allowed to run.

Thanks to a string of military victories against the country's Marxist guerillas, Uribe is riding high in the polls. A Gallup survey puts his job-approval rating at 78 percent.

But critics warn that Uribe could damage his reputation and Colombia's close relations with the United States by seeking three consecutive terms.

Latin America has a history of military dictators. Thus, when democracy spread across the region in the late 1980s and early '90s, the constitutions of many of these nations were rewritten to prohibit presidential re-election.

Uribe engineered one constitutional change that allowed him to run for a second term in 2006. That effort led to allegations that members of his Cabinet had secured congressional support by promising jobs and other favors to legislators.

Going for a third term in 2010 ''would display an authoritarian tendency,'' said Michael Shifter of the Inter-American Dialogue think tank in Washington. ``It would also hurt his legacy which, on balance, has been very positive.''

Uribe has been vague, keeping all of his options on the table and thus avoiding the handicap of becoming a lame-duck leader.

Speaking before a university audience, he said he preferred to promote new leaders and to improve national security during his remaining two years in office and that the reelection issue would be a distraction.

''I think it's much better that Colombians consolidate the policies of democratic security, investor confidence and social cohesion rather than worry about the president remaining in power,'' he said.
Shortly afterward, however, he indicated he would run should the campaign of the would-be successor from his political coalition falter.

But Uribe's maneuvering has prevented Defense Minister Juan Manuel Santos and other pro-government candidates from launching their own campaigns, which could provide an opening for the opposition.

First sworn in in 2002, then reelected in 2006 by a landslide, Uribe made his mark by improving security in a nation plagued by kidnappings and where left-wing guerrillas and right-wing paramilitaries held control of huge swaths of the countryside.

ENLARGED ARMY

Uribe added more than 100,000 troops to the armed forces. They have captured or killed key guerrilla leaders while thousands of paramilitaries have disarmed.

The military's most spectacular feat was a July 2 operation that rescued 15 high-profile hostages, including former presidential candidate Ingrid Betancourt and three U.S. military contractors.

ECONOMY IMPROVED

Although the illegal drug trade remains robust, improved security has brought more tourism and foreign investment to Colombia and sparked six years of economic growth.

Still, everyone from Uribe's advisers to leading businessmen and his wife reportedly have urged him to step down in 2010.

''We shouldn't confuse the admiration that the business community has for Uribe with the danger of extending his rule longer than is advisable,'' said Luis Carlos Villegas, president of ANDI, an influential business association.

CLOUDS LINGER

Uribe has been weakened by a long-running investigation into ties between paramilitaries and his political allies in the Congress. Nearly 70 legislators, almost all of them pro-Uribe, are either in prison or under investigation, a scandal that has led to calls for the election of a new Congress.

In addition, Uribe has feuded with Supreme Court justices investigating the paramilitary scandal, has traded insults with former Colombian presidents and accused human rights organizations of working with the guerrillas.

''The president should consider taking a break to re-charge his batteries,'' declared a recent editorial in the

Bogotá newspaper El

Tiempo.

ECUADOR: La participación del pueblo rige en la nueva Constitución

La participación del pueblo rige en la nueva Constitución

En el proyecto de nueva Constitución el pueblo ecuatoriano participará en la toma de decisiones públicas y privadas. El pueblo actuará en todos los niveles de gobierno.

Edison Solis Quito- Ecuador 5-9-2008 67 lecturas

Fuente: www.kaosenlared.net/noticia/participacion-pueblo-rige-nueva-constitucion

En el proyecto de nueva Constitución, que entrará a referéndum el próximo 28 de septiembre, existen varios artículos que permiten al pueblo ecuatoriano, a través de representantes de organizaciones populares, a formar parte de la toma de decisiones, planificación y gestión de los asuntos públicos.

El título cuarto, que se refiere a la Participación y Organización del Poder, establece claramente, en la mayoría de articulados, que este derecho, que ha sido pisoteado por los gobiernos neoliberales, se cumpla en esta nueva Constitución. Algo que a decir de varios analistas, asesores y dirigentes populares, es un proyecto Constitucional donde ha participado el pueblo ecuatoriano.

Así lo confirma Patricio Torres, asesor del asambleísta por el Movimiento Popular Democrático (MPD), Jorge Escala, quien indica que, entre otros artículos, el 95 define la participación de forma individual y colectiva en la toma de decisiones de los asuntos públicos. Agrega que, además de éste importante derecho, se establece un control de las instituciones del Estado, de la sociedad y de sus representantes. El letrado indica que se reconoce todo forma de organización y control como expresión de la soberanía popular.

“Entre aspectos más relevantes se encuentra el artículo 98 donde los individuos y los colectivos podrán ejercer el derecho a la resistencia frente a acciones u omisiones del poder público y demandar el reconocimiento de nuevos derechos. Además, se establece que todos los niveles de gobierno estarán integrados por instancias de participación ciudadana de elección popular” indica Torres.

Uno de los artículos que con mayor énfasis es reconocido por este asesor es el 119 donde se reconoce que para ser asambleísta se requerirá tener nacionalidad ecuatoriana, gozar de los derechos ciudadanos, y especialmente, tener 18 años. Según Torres, a esto se suma el voto optativo para los jóvenes que tengas 16 años y es proceso histórico en Ecuador y el Mundo. Indica que en esta constitución se reconoce el papel de las luchas populares y académicas para forjar un pensamiento que plantee la transformación de este sistema.

En cuanto a las formas de democracia directa, específicamente a la consulta popular, permite que ésta se realice a petición de la ciudadanía sin reforma constitucional cuando se haya logrado la adhesión del ocho por ciento del padrón electoral. Por lo tanto, la consulta popular será un mecanismo para que el pueblo se pronuncie para realizar reformas Constitucionales o aspectos locales. Entre varios de los artículos que toman en cuenta al poder del pueblo como mandante y primer fiscalizador se encuentran los artículos 96, 100,101, 108,111, 120, 204, 208.

Para el Presidente de la Federación Única Nacional del Seguro Social Campesino (Feunassc), Byron Garcés, el proyecto de Constitución es democrático y participativo porque recogió las propuestas de todos los sectores, especialmente, de los campesinos. Asegura que siempre han luchado de hecho para que el movimiento campesino participe en la toma de decisiones fundamentales para su organización, sin embargo, afirma que ahora en el nuevo proyecto de Constitución se reconoce a su lucha no solo de hecho sino también de derecho. Agrega que antes las comunidades campesinas que no tienen acceso a las tierras para que los organismos correspondientes puedan atender sus pedidos, pero que ahora, además de vigilar la gestión de las instituciones públicas, exigirán que luchen por adquirir nuevos derechos y se cumplan con sus nuevas exigencias.

“Me parece muy oportuno que ahora los sectores populares podamos realizar veedurías directas de la cosa pública. Es positivo además que se reconozca a la organización colectiva de la sociedad porque antes solo eran tomadas en cuenta aquellas que funcionaban con el carácter de derecho, ahora pueden funcionar también las de hecho. Sin embargo, la base social será aquella que reconozca la labor de sus dirigentes” manifestó el titular de la Feunassc.

Agrega que existirá el Consejo de Participación Ciudadana y Control Social donde deberá estar integrada por las personas y organizaciones más probas y de aquellas que han mantenido una lucha histórica. Asegura que no estarían de acuerdo que formen parte de este Consejo algunos representantes ONG’s cuestionados por la opinión pública.

TAIWAN: First Civil Referendum to be Held

Kaohsiung to hold island's first civil referendum

Publication Date: 10/16/2008 Section: National Affairs
By Ellen Ko
Source: http://taiwanjournal.nat.gov.tw/ct.asp?CtNode=122&xItem=45219

For the first time, a referendum initiated by a civil group rather than a political party will take place Nov. 15 in Kaohsiung City. Voters will be asked whether to cap primary and high school class size at 25 students, according to the Kaohsiung City Election Commission.

The referendum, initiated by the Kaohsiung Teachers' Association, aims to reduce the average number of students in primary and high school classes in the city from the current 30.8 and 33.8 respectively to 25 by 2011. As the first referendum held by a local government and initiated by a civil group rather than a political party since the passage of the Referendum Act in November 2003, this event is considered a landmark in Taiwan's history of direct democracy.

Three national referenda on six proposals have been held since the Referendum Act was first passed. All were highly political issues proposed by the two major political parties, and none achieved the 50-percent threshold of participation to validate.

At the "World of Direct Democracy" global seminar organized by the Initiative and Referendum Institute Europe Oct. 1-2 in Switzerland, Hwang Jau-yuan, professor of law at National Taiwan University, called the case a good start of direct democracy in Taiwan. "The referendum in Kaohsiung is a demonstration of bottom-up democracy, which is a good sign for its development in Taiwan," he said. It is worth observing whether the referendum can pass the threshold of 50-percent turnout, he added.

The teachers' association began its campaign in January 2006. It first submitted the collected signatures in January 2008 in the hope that the referendum could be held in tandem with the presidential election in March. But the Kaohsiung City Election Commission reviewed the names and concluded that the association failed to garner enough valid signatures to meet the requirements for public endorsement--54,643 names or 5 percent of the eligible voters in the city.

The association quickly re-submitted a new list of signatures. On May 23, the commission announced that the case had officially qualified for a referendum.

By law, a turnout of 50 percent of registered voters, around 570,000 in Kaohsiung, is required to validate a referendum, and half of the votes need to be favorable for the proposal to pass. The association's referendum is expected to cost the city government an estimated US$855,000.

Kaohsiung's Education Bureau has voiced its opposition to the proposal, saying it will increase the city's financial burden. If the proposal is passed, it would mean adding 281 classes and providing 490 more teachers, as well as spending another US$984,600 per year on staff, not to speak of the money needed to build another 874 classrooms, said Chen Chin-yuan, deputy chief of the Bureau. Furthermore, it was argued that the referendum was pointless because the goal of 25 children per class would eventually be achieved through the declining birth rate.

Renn Hwai-ming, director of KTA Education Policy Center, said that the referendum is significant in terms of grassroots democracy as well as educational reform. However, he also admitted that the association is rather pessimistic about the prospects of the referendum. "We missed a great opportunity by not holding it jointly with the 2008 Presidential Election. Though our campaign gathers momentum each day, the interest for public issues and the drive to vote are simply unparalleled during election times," he said. Furthermore, limited by budget, the number of polling stations for the referendum is set at 203, far less than the 848 provided for the 2008 presidential election and the 839 for the last city mayor election, he added, stressing that the turnout would be seriously affected by the commission's arrangement.

"Should the referendum fail, by law we will not be able to raise the same issue again for the next three years. But we think it is still worth trying. At least, we have demonstrated to the public a constructive way of discussing public issues and the real essence of democracy," Renn said.

Write to Ellen Ko at ellenko@mail.gio.gov.tw

SOUTH AFRICA: Izimbizo Helps to Fight Corruption

Izimbizo helps to fight corruption in government

Source: http://www.buanews.gov.za/news/08/08101314151004
Compiled by the Government Communication and Information System
Date: 13 Oct 2008

By Siboniso Ntuli

eThewkini - Government programmes such as national, provincial and local Izimbizo have assisted in the fight against corruption.

Addressing the delegates at the KwaZulu-Natal Anti-Corruption Summit at the Inkosi Albert Luthuli International Convention Centre (ICC) on Monday, Premier Sbu Ndebele said Izimibizo gave people the opportunity to raise issues of corruption through participatory democracy.

"The fact that the corruption can also be raised through participatory democracy is a sign that our democracy is mature. People can talk openly and freely and this is a major guarantee when compared to dictatorship and tyranny."

The two-day summit, themed: Towards an integrated system promoting good governance with emphasis on anti-corruption and ethics, aims to assess the prevalence and impact of fraud and corruption to service delivery in the province.

Mr Ndebele urged his peers and colleagues to talk to their counterparts who may be involved in corruption practices and find reasoning, if any, behind such behaviour.

"People who do not report corruption are equally guilty," said Premier Ndebele.

Other objectives of the summit include exploring effective preventive mechanisms aimed at combating the occurrence of fraud and corruption.

It also hopes to examine challenges for both combating and preventing corruption as well as exploring avenues for promoting professional ethics, among other things.

KwaZulu-Natal Director General, Dr Kwazi Mbanjwa said government departments should put aside a budget that can be used to fight corruption.

"We need to have an effective system, where members of the public can use to report corruption, without putting their lives at risk," said Dr Mbanjwa.

Delegates attending the summit include MECs, Heads of Departments, Chief Financial Officers, Municipal Managers, Risk Managers, Special Investigation Managers, Security Managers, Internal Control Managers, and other entities active and involved in Anti-Corruption in KwaZulu-Natal. - BuaNews

ESPAÑA: Se Realizó Congreso de Inovación Democrática en Santa Cristina d'Aro

Congreso de Innovación Democrática

La influencia ideológica que han ejercido las doctrinas y prácticas neoliberales en la acción política, negadoras de lo público e incentivadoras del individualismo más descarnado, se ha ido produciendo una crisis de la representación política. Surgen además con fuerza en los países con sistemas de democracia representativa fenómenos innegables, como es el del crecimiento de la abstención electoral, o también un incremento de la desconfianza de los ciudadanos hacia los representantes y en general de lo que podríamos llamar lo político y lo público.

Los procesos de redemocratización iniciados en Latinoamérica en la segunda mitad de los años ochenta del siglo XX, están permitiendo sin embargo la puesta en escena de prácticas concretas de democracia que concitan un interés creciente.

Entre éstas nuevas prácticas democráticas figura, en un lugar destacado, el instrumento conocido como el ?Presupuesto Participativo? iniciado en la ciudad de Porto Alegre (Brasil). En la actualidad, éste instrumento de participación política se ha extendido por el resto del mundo, siendo más de 300 los municipios que han implementado instrumentos de este tipo.

Este Congreso se centrará en el análisis de las experiencias participativas innovadoras a la luz de las aportaciones del debate contemporáneo sobre la democracia.

Para ello pretendemos dividir los debates de este Congreso en dos apartados. En el primero se debatirá sobre el funcionamiento de los actuales sistemas políticos representativos que inciden en la calidad de la democracia.

En el segundo se analizará, desde una perspectiva descriptiva, los instrumentos de democracia participativa que pretenden mejorar la calidad de la democrática, contribuyendo con ello objetivamente a la relegitimación del sistema democrático en su conjunto pero sin que eso signifique en modo alguno la sustitución del sistema de democracia representativa.


+ info:
www.santacristina.net/congreso/programa_...

CANADA: Candidate Supports Direct Democracy

Unfortunately this candidate from British Columbia who is a strong supporter of direct democracy only received one percent of the vote in the recent Canadian elections which saw gains for the conservative party. - Editor


Seymour spreading awareness

Published: October 09, 2008 6:00 PM
Updated: October 09, 2008 6:21 PM
Source: http://www.bclocalnews.com/okanagan_similkameen/vernonmorningstar/community/30723499.html

This is the last in a series of profiles on Okanagan-Shuswap candidates for the Oct. 14 federal election.

Darren Seymour of the Canadian Action Party says Canadians need to turn off the television and learn what is happening in their country.

Running in the federal election for the second time, Seymour says Canadians should be aware that over the past 50 years, Conservative and Liberal governments have given control of the country over to multi-national corporations.

“The feds have handed over the most sacred, crucial responsibility that a government has and that is creation of money for the country,” he says emphatically. “ Most people don’t understand money has to be created and as country grows more money has to be created. It is the most vital factor that determines the health of the country.”

He insists the majority of the money is being created as debt by the private banking industry.

Seymour also believes Canada’s sovereignty is being destroyed with deals like Free Trade. He charges that the deal had nothing to do with free trade, but was a corporate bill of rights.

“Now there’s the Security Prosperity Partnership, which is being created as quietly as possible,” he says. “This is seriously going to destroy the ability of Canada to make decisions about its own future.”

Instead, Seymour cautions the country will be dictated to directly by the biggest corporations in North America. He says Canadian taxpayers are mostly unaware that they are paying for 20 working groups “that are integrating and harmonizing all aspects of Canada, the U.S. and Mexico into a North American union, benefiting the biggest corporations and not benefiting small business or the Canadian people.”

Another key point Seymour says his party would address is the presence of the Canadian Forces in Afghanistan, something he says was built on U.S. administration lies perpetrated by large media outlets.

“There’s overwhelming evidence 9-11 was carried out by elements inside the U.S.,” he says. “People have to take responsibility to discover the truth if we’re going to take our country back.”

Seymour recommends voters visit globalresearch.ca before they decide how to vote.

A stock trader by profession, Seymour became interested in politics about 10 years ago when he delved into the banking system..

“It was my first awakening that things are not the way they seem. There’s lots of underlying stuff going on that we don’t know about,” he says. “It evolved from there, I became more aware and started doing research and learning.”

He says the more he learned, the angrier he got, and the more he wanted to get involved.

“I wanted to do something to engage in the world I live in.”

Seymour started an organization called Our World Community Collective, which was designed for people to learn collectively about their governments. He also designed a voting system that would allow voters’ concerns to be heard.

In his direct democracy system, members of the group identify their top concerns, with action taken on the issues most frequently addressed.

“If I am elected, I will donate 75 percent of my salary to the direct democracy system, where we can learn together and vote on what we want to do about it,” he says.

“The Canadian Action party is the only solution to get us out of this downward spiral.,” he says.

BRASIL: e-Democracia - Em Breve Eleitor Poderá Votar sem Sair de Casa

Em breve eleitor poderá votar sem sair de casa

Fonte: http://www.jornaltribuna.com.br/politica.php?id_materia=31803

O Centro de Informática e Automação do Estado de Santa Catarina (Ciasc), está testando um sistema que realiza a apuração das eleições em tempo real, em um aparelho smartphone, e que permite ao usuário votar sem sair de casa. De acordo com o presidente do Ciasc, Hugo Hoeschl, este programa irá inovar em nível mundial o processo de evolução da democracia. Para participar do teste é só enviar uma mensagem SMS para (48) 9947 0120 e responder a pergunta que contém as opções de 001 a 009. O teste está disponível em www.wiki.ciasc.gov.br.

Hoeschl, que também é doutor em Inteligência Aplicada e professor da Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC), informa que as eleições municipais costumam custar ao Brasil cerca de R$ 1 bilhão. Segundo ele, com a nova tecnologia se gastaria 5% desse valor, o que representaria uma economia significativa aos cofres públicos. Sobre as possíveis fraudes eleitorais, ele diz que o processo utiliza critérios de controles, como senhas e criptografias. "O que a gente vê nas eleições é que, quanto mais tecnologia, mais o processo se torna seguro".

O presidente do Ciasc afirma também que, brevemente, não existirá mais esse formato de eleições. "A primeira coisa que vai mudar é a temporalidade das eleições. Uma eleição pode começar no primeiro dia do mês e ir até o dia 15. As pessoas podem votar de madrugada, de manhã, no domingo e no sábado. Não precisa parar o país para fazer uma eleição", relata.

Outro fator defendido por Hoeschl é que a urna digital permitiria que aproximadamente 20 milhões de pessoas, que estão fora de seu domicilio eleitoral, pudessem votar de qualquer localidade. "A medida que você enviou o SMS, e essa mensagem chegou, imediatamente o voto é computado. Não há necessidade de um processo eleitoral. É claro que precisamos estudar e construir modelos para que haja fiscalização, controle e acompanhamento".

O sistema de votação faz parte do projeto Laboratório de Democracia Direta Digital (LabD3), que tem por objetivo prospectar, desenvolver e testar aplicativos voltados, principalmente, para as tecnologias contemporâneas, que serão disponibilizados por meio de dispositivos como: celular, internet, TV digital, videogames, urnas eletrônicas, caixas automáticas, call center e ambientes comunitários virtuais (MySpace, Orkut, SecondLife, etc.), possibilitando por estes meios que o cidadão possa participar diretamente das decisões públicas nas mais variadas áreas.

PERU: ¿Por qué la Revocatoria?

¿Por qué la revocatoria?

El poder en manos del ciudadano no es solo un atributo, es además una facultad que tiene para ejercerlo

Por Francisco Miró Quesada Rada

Fuente: http://www.elcomercio.com.pe/Edicionimpresa/Html/2008-09-29/por-que-revocatoria.html

La democracia, desde que fue creada por los atenienses significa 'poder del pueblo' (demos: pueblo, cratos: poder). En consecuencia, el pueblo es el poseedor del poder, su titular.

El poder no es solo un atributo o una relación social, es además una facultad que tiene el individuo para ejercerlo. No se consigue nada con poseer poder sin ejercerlo, por eso cuando las democracias comenzaron a reducirle el poder a la monarquía, hasta dejarla sin ninguna capacidad de ejercicio, surgió la famosa frase "reina pero no gobierna". En consecuencia, el pueblo no solo debe poseer poder sino ejercerlo.

Existen dos formas de ejercer el poder en la democracia moderna. A través de los representantes o directamente. No son dos democracias distintas. La representativa y la directa constituyen modalidades de ejercicio del poder perfectamente compatibles. Lo que sucede es que en la directa, llamada también participativa, el ciudadano ejerce el poder sin intermediación.

Son diversas las instituciones de la democracia directa y entre ellas se encuentra la revocatoria, considerada un derecho que tiene el elector de remover a una autoridad elegida antes de que concluya el período de su mandato. Cuando estudiamos la legislación extranjera vemos que la revocatoria varía en cada país y depende tanto de la realidad como de las contingencias políticas en una sociedad.

En Estados Unidos se llama 'recall'. Funciona en algunos estados de la Unión Americana, condados y distritos. En América Latina las autoridades pueden ser revocadas en el Perú, Colombia, Cuba, Venezuela y el Ecuador, pero no todas.

Las constituciones de Venezuela y del Ecuador reconocen la revocatoria del presidente de la República. En el proyecto constitucional boliviano, la revocatoria se aplica para todas las autoridades, pero no existe un artículo específico que se refiera al presidente de la República.

Un grupo de ciudadanos ha planteado la revocatoria del presidente en nuestro país. Es una propuesta política y democrática, como muchas otras, por ejemplo la de los congresistas. Pero para que proceda se tendría que reformar la Constitución, porque de acuerdo con nuestro ordenamiento constitucional, solo pueden ser revocadas las autoridades regionales y municipales.

Ha causado preocupación esta propuesta argumentándose que puede generar inestabilidad política y afectar la gobernabilidad. Sin embargo, para lograr un equilibrio entre el poder del pueblo y el poder del presidente, la solución a mi modo de ver es que se establezcan causales, de esta manera el presidente solo podrá ser revocado en caso que incumpliera esas causales. Así como las autoridades tienen límites en el ejercicio del poder, también el ciudadano debe tenerlos.

La democracia, como hace tres siglos sostenía Montesquieu, es un sistema de "pesos y contrapesos". Se basa en el equilibrio de poderes para evitar la tiranía de un poder sobre otro u otros.

La racionalidad de este equilibrio radica en la ley y si una ley obedece a criterios de justicia, es decir de simetría, todo ciudadano, sea autoridad o no, debe respetarla.

NIGERIA: A Lecture on Participatory Democracy

Odinga and Participatory Democracy

10.13.2008

Source: http://www.thisdayonline.com/nview.php?id=125006

The Prime Minister of the Republic of Kenya, Hon. Raila A Odinga, in a lecture he delivered to commemorate the 25th anniverssary of The Guardian Newspaper in Lagos last week canvassed the practise of participatory democracy in the African continent. Ademola Adeyemo who attended the lecture reports

The gathering at the silver jubilee lecture of The Guardian Newspapers was a meeting of people of rich intellectual mind drawn from the media, the academia and the business circle who were at the Nigerian Institute for International Affairs,venue of the lecture to honour the invitation extended to them by the newspapers’ publisher , Mr Alex Ibru

The Guest lecturer, Hon Raila Odinga who became the Prime Minister of Kenya after a disputed and widely condemned ekection that claimed many lives talked about the problem of democracy in Africa and why the continent is under developed , According to him , whether African leaders like it or not, 90% of African people want democracy as a form of government

Said he " . The intrinsic values of democracy and good governance, and aspirations towards that condition, are universal. Ninety per cent of Africans say they want to live in a democracy, and this year, we have shown in Kenya, and Zimbabweans have also demonstrated that Africans are now more determined than ever before to have their say in governance. Since the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, most of the remaining single-party dictatorships and one-man military regimes in Africa have crumbled and given way to emergent multi-party systems. There is an intense focus on replacing bad governance with good, and on the reform of political, economic, social and legal structures. There has been significant progress, but the way ahead is potholed with challenges.

According to him, Africa is the richest in terms of resources, and yet the poorest in terms of living standards. But he identified the major problem of Africa as that of being a victim of the self-interest of its exploiters. "The richest nations throughout history have used and abused our continent to fuel their own economies, extracting and benefiting from our raw materials and in the process hindering our development and entrenching poverty. This history led former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair to remark that conditions in Africa were "a scar on the conscience of the world".

"Each year, nearly 15 million people die in Africa from causes that have their roots in poverty. To heal that scar requires sound, selfless and moral political leadership. At independence, we knew we could not rewrite the past, but we knew we could make a bold commitment to changing the future. We needed inspirational and visionary leadership that would perform effectively and deliver for the people.

Odinga also said African leaders who emerged after the independence had good vision, but unfortunately, they were swept aside and a group of exploiters of people and their wealth took over. ". Instead of ensuring state and individual security, a functioning rule of law, education, health, and an economic framework conducive to trade, growth and prosperity, they in many cases have entrenched despotic power to pursue personal enrichment. It is a sad fact that most of our people are too young to have known anything else".

Giving the example of Zimbabwe, he said" A recent and current example of someone who has dragged our continent's name through the mud yet again is Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe. We were thrilled when Mugabe took power as Zimbabwe gained its independence, but he has turned out to be a grotesque parody of a leader. He became a brutal dictator, whose contempt for democracy he openly expressed when he said: "We are not going to give up our country for a mere X on a ballot. How can a ballpoint pen fight the gun?" These are chilling words uttered by a national leader in a continent struggling to entrench democratic ideals".

Odinga who criticized the African Union(AU) for not doing enough to solve the problem of Africa also accused leaders of maintaining criminal silence when they failed to condemn brutal regimes and sham elections, including the second round poll in Zimbabwe earlier this year.

"But we should not be surprised at the AU's failure to stand up for democracy. Many of our national leaders have skeletons rattling loudly in their cupboards. Their personal misdeeds bond these leaders in a diabolical conspiracy of silence and complicity, in refusal to condemn their neighbours for fear of the spotlight falling upon themselves."

But he however said the dictatorship of the leaders will not stand any longer as the people of Africa have undergone an attitudinal change towards any leadership that fails to meet their expectations." They are calling leaders to account. In the past four years alone, there have been more than 50 democratic elections in Africa, and more than two-thirds of sub-Saharan African nations live in freedom. This is the first exciting step on the way to achieving the kind of leadership that can sustain democracy and bring prosperity to our continent." he further said.

True democaracy, according to Odinga is about freedom of choice, a universal concept that is meaningless without free and fair elections where the people can choose those who will govern them, and also dismiss those who have failed them. "Genuine democracy is also about freedom of expression and association, under which people can form themselves into likeminded groups and seek political power. It is about the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary, without which none of the other freedoms can be secured. Most importantly, genuine democracy is about transparency and accountability in government"

He also expressed regret that corruption has been and remains the major scourge preventing economic growth and stability in African nations which, he said, has constituted a barrier to national development, t infrastructural growth, t trade and investment and moral authority .

Said he "Corruption is a close relative of ethnicity, the enemy of national unity. While each of us is rightly proud of our origins, our traditions, the stories of the ancients told by our griots, and the security and warmth of a shared cultural identity, the time has come when we must turn our backs on negative ethnicity, the kind that has been used to destroy our fellow countrymen and women.

We need the developed world and they need us. We need significant private investment, and they need a strong and that groundwork can only lie in a bold determination to commit long-term to good governance and leadership on our continent, building development-oriented solutions for our myriad problems, and embracing true humanitarianism in our democratic revolution. It is a vital step for all of us, whether we are Kenyan, Nigerian, Zimbabwean, South African or a citizen of any other country on this great continent"

Odinga however concluded his lecture by challenging African leaders to rise up and take their destinies. in their own hands saying " we have the power, we have the opportunity. We can change our world. Our only enemy is inaction - otherwise, everything is possible. We must confront our demons, raise our heads proudly, shoulder the burden and go the extra mile. We must make democratic change - and all that this entails - not just possible, but a reality

Former Head of State, General Yakubu Gowon in his remarks said the stand of Odinga represented a new phase of African politics. "They really have vision and determination to put in their best and to put things right in their countries and Africa as a whole. The man gave a very good lecture and as you can see a lot of it came from the heart."

On Odinga's insistence that the right to vote should be accompanied with the right to be voted for, the former head of state described the view as a very bright one. "We should always allow the people to determine who they want to entrust their rights to; who they want to put in office. We should refrain from tinkering with the system to give advantage to pre-determined people. I have no problems with that at all and I can understand the premise he's coming from," Gowon said.

According to him, there is need for Nigeria to strengthen its democracy. His words: "One of the problems is that we practice democracy in a very selfish way; in a wrong way. There should be no question on African democracy or a European democracy. Democracy is democracy and it needs to be practised in the correct way everywhere in the world. If it is done correctly and everybody plays by the rule of the game, all will be well. If your vote and my vote count, and it is respected and done correctly, then all will be well. I really hope that will happen one day in this country. He lamented that it is a pity that no African country can beat its chest to say it is practising true democracy today "Elections were being rigged accross Africa and this call for serious concern . Gowon also appealed to the leaders of Zimbabwe and Kenya to desist from "politics of winners take all "

Other guests also commented on Odinga’s lecture and agreed with the Kenyan Prime Minister on the theme of his lecture . They however picked holes with his recommended solutions to the problems of democracy in Africa.

Former governor of Ogun state, Chief Olusegun Osoba disagreed with the suggestion of using the political model of Kenya and Zimbabwe for resolving political problems in Africa. His words: "I'm still not sure whether the Kenyan or Zimbabwean option is a solution to African problems. When dictators rigged election and then go round to negotiate and give crumbs to the winner of the election, this gives one reasons for concern. I don't believe it is a solution to democracy in Africa. Democracy is democracy anywhere in the world.

"However, the right to elect, according to Odinga, must also be accompanied by the right to be elected, otherwise a man like Barack Obama will not be talking of even emerging presidential candidate of one of the major political parties in the United States, not to talk of ruling America. The right to elect must also come with the right to be elected. It's a long way for us, but I am confident we will get there one day."

Former governor of Kaduna state ,,Alhaji Balarabe Musa while rejecting the Kenyan model for Nigeria also,said "Everybody knows that in 2003, the PDP did not win the presidential election. In 2007, they did not win the presidential election. If you say, let it go for the sake of peace, then we would never have a legitimate election in Nigeria. We will continue to have illegitimate government. The Kenyan solution is not good for Nigeria, and I cannot recommend it to any country. The peoples' votes must count. The people must decide who should lead them."

Musa insisted that the right to elect and be elected, which Odinga advocated, does not exist in Nigeria. He said: "In the last election, no voting took place at all in some places and yet results were announced in those places. You also look at inflated votes, consensus candidates, buying candidates and voters with money. In Nigeria, you have the worst situation where there is no right to vote and there is no right to contest. Even when you force your way to contest, it is meaningless. Even if you vote, it is meaningless."

The Second Republic governor said the quality of the Nigerian politics is very low. "In fact, the Nigerian politics has now become a commercial proposition. That's why we are talking of the illegitimate thing, by the ANPP in particular and all the other political parties that have come to join the rigger of elections -- the PDP - in what they call Government of National Unity," said the radical politician.

Revolution, according Musa, still remains the option for solving the Nigerian political debacle.
"When we say revolution, we don't mean violence or armed struggle; we mean fundamental changes. This fundamental change can come in the form of election, which is no longer possible; it can come through the National Assembly; again this is not possible with what we have on the ground. This fundamental change can also come through government realising the dangers of corrupt political arrangement to themselves and for the country; again this is not possible.

"But the people can exercise their rights either through sustainable street demonstrations on specific national issues or social revolution. What other countries have done, Nigeria can also do. The time may not have come yet, but it will come. We have reached the end of the road."Musa further submitted.

BRAZIL: Public Management Councils

BRASIL: Public Management Councils

The following website is an excellent resource for learning about local governance in Brazil. As has been noted previously in this blog, Brazil has been a trend-setting country in participatory democracy and participatory budgeting. Communities and organizations have much to learn from the structure exemplified on the following site (click on the link):

http://www.pbh.gov.br/redebrasileiraop/newsletter/ing/ing_14.htm

For more information in Portuguese, see the homepage of Red Brasileira
Pra mas informações em Portugues clique na siguente:

here: http://www.pbh.gov.br/redebrasileiraop/

ESPAÑA: Presupuestos Participativos en San Fernando de Henares

Los vecinos decidirán sobre el Presupuesto Municipal de San Fernando para el próximo año

26.09.2008

Fuente: http://www.estedemadrid.com/noticia_comentada.asp?id=9909

PRESUPUESTOS PARTICIPATIVOS EN SAN FERNANDO DE HENARES El Observatorio Local de Democracia Participativa comenzó ayer lo que su iniciativa principal, con 60 representantes de entidades municipales, colectivos, asociaciones y Foro Ciudadano. El programa está orientado a que los vecinos decidan sobre el Presupuesto Municipal de San Fernando para el próximo año. San Fernando de Henares, 26/09/08 El Gobierno de San Fernando ha presentado el Programa de Presupuestos Participativos, como iniciativa central del Observatorio Local de Democracia Participativa. A la presentación acudieron en torno a 60 personas, como representantes de diferentes entidades municipales, colectivos, asociaciones, y del Foro Ciudadano (colectivo que agrupa al movimiento social de San Fernando.) El programa de Presupuestos Participativos está orientado a acercar la Administración Local a la ciudadanía, tratando de hacer partícipe al vecino/a de las decisiones que se toman desde el Gobierno local y consciente de la ciudad donde vive. El instrumento a utilizar es el Presupuesto Municipal donde tendrán reflejo sus ideas y opiniones. Objetivos El objetivo de este programa de Presupuestos Participativos es: -Impulsar la participación Ciudadana como mecanismo de profundización democrática. -Propiciar mecanismos para extender la participación de la ciudadanía, individual o colectiva, en la confección de los Presupuestos Municipales anuales. -Abrir nuevos cauces de Participación ciudadana que supongan una profundización en las prácticas de la democracia participativa. -Redistribuir los recursos municipales y mejorar las condiciones de vida de la población y sus barrios.

EU: Initiative Citoyenne Européenne - Toujours plus de Démocratie Directe !

Initiative Citoyenne Européenne - toujours plus de démocratie directe !

Institutions - 06-10-2008 - 16:05

Source: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/public/story_page/008-38745-338-12-49-901-20081006STO38717-2008-03-12-2008/default_fr.htm

"1 million de voix. 1 message : mettre fin à la pauvreté".
La démocratie participative moderne pourrait-elle établir un rapprochement entre l'Europe et ses citoyens? C'est en tout cas ce à quoi aspire le nouveau traité de l'Union européenne qui, bien que toujours en attente après le « non » irlandais du mois de juin, inclut, pour la première fois à un niveau supranational, un droit à l'initiative pour les citoyens européens.

De quoi s'agit-il exactement?

L'Initiative Citoyenne Européenne (ICE), qui a été introduite par le Traité de Lisbonne, correspond à la première mise au point d'un instrument transnational de démocratie directe. Grâce à cet instrument, les citoyens pourront avoir l'opportunité de demander à la Commission européenne de proposer de nouvelles lois européennes après avoir récolté un million de signatures à travers un certain nombre d'Etats-membres.

Le but d'un tel accroissement de la participation des citoyens est de rendre l'Union européenne plus réactive, plus représentative et plus légitime. Il s'agit en réalité d'une forme de démocratie directe qui atteint pour la première fois un niveau supranational.

L'Initiative Citoyenne Européenne sera-t-elle mise en pratique ?

Le 18 septembre 2008, la commission parlementaire des affaires constitutionnelles (AFCO) s'est penchée sur la mise au point de lignes directrices pour l'exécution de l'ICE ainsi que sur la préparation du rapport de Mme Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann (allemande, membre du groupe GUE/NGL) sur le sujet, en vue d'une proposition de régulation pour sa mise en vigueur.

Ouvrant le débat, le président de l'AFCO, M. Jo Leinen (allemand, membre du PSE) a rappelé que le but de cette initiative était de transformer l'Europe des Etats en l'Europe des citoyens. C'est de cette manière que sera donnée la possibilité aux citoyens de s'impliquer davantage dans l'Europe. Par ailleurs, M. Leinen a précisé qu'il espérait que le Traité de Lisbonne soit adopté avant les élections européennes de 2009.

Le Professeur Jürgen Meyer, ancien membre du Bundenstag (Parlement allemand) et de la Convention européenne (qui a travaillé sur le projet de constitution européenne) et appartenant au groupe de personnes à l'origine de cette initiative, a expliqué pourquoi le million de signatures à atteindre n'est pas un chiffre anodin car il donnera à l'initiative un certain poids. En ce qui concerne le nombre d'Etats-membres dont devraient provenir les signatures, il estime qu'il en faut au moins quatre mais pas plus de six et que la manière de les collecter devra être la moins bureaucratique possible et s'inscrire dans un laps de temps de un à deux ans.

Le rapporteur Mme Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann précisa que, contrairement à ce que l'on pourrait penser, il ne s'agit pas d'une pétition à grande échelle mais bien d'un nouvel instrument permettant de faciliter la démocratie participative supranationale. Par ailleurs, il s'agira d'une porte ouverte à la démocratie directe qui encouragera les citoyens à participer activement à l'Europe. Il est toutefois primordial que l'ICE s'inscrive dans les traditions juridiques (et culturelles) des différents Etats pour être légitime.

A noter enfin que les membres d'ONG ont également souligné l'importance d'un cadre juridique approprié pour l'ICE, incluant notamment la possibilité de faire appel en cas d'irrecevabilité. Ils ont également insisté sur le fait que tous les habitants de l’Union européenne, et pas seulement les citoyens, devraient avoir y avoir accès.

Le rapport devrait être voté en commission parlementaire en janvier 2009.

COLOMBIA: Upcoming Referendum on Water Rights

Enough signatures have been collected to put a referendum on water rights on the ballot next year in Colombia. This is the result of a strong grassroots effort. The referendum would establish water as a basic right and protect water resources from privatization. Another more contentious initiative that will be put on the ballot next year would amend the country's constitution in order to allow President Alvaro Uribe to run for a third consecutive term in 2010. When Hugo Chavez of Venezuela attempted to include a similar measure on term limits in a referendum package of constitutional reforms, he was widely criticized by his opponents as being an authoritarian dictator. Some are now levelling the same criticism at Alvaro Uribe of Colombia for his refusal to rule out a third term and denounce the referendum. Stay tuned, for we will be posting more about that referendum in the near future. - Editor

Over Two Million Citizens Supported Water Referendum

Bogota, September 15, 2008
Source: http://www.blueplanetproject.net/Movement/BogotaReferendum.html

Approximately one thousand people marched from the National University of Colombia to the National Registry in Bogota to submitt 2,044,267 signatures supporting the Water Referendum. A colourful bus full of children from different schools of the city, like guardians of their future, closed the march. Colombian music performed by young people in stilts gave it a joyful and carnival atmosphere. At 3 pm aqueduct workers, environmentalists, indigenous people, public service supporters, and men and women of various ages entered, like a water torrent, the National Registry, to submit the signatures to the National Registrar. Without speeches and with little formalities, the diversity of expressions supporting this Referendum were shown, through moving statements of women of various ages; a little girl, an indigenous women.

Rafael Colmenares, spokesperson of the National Committee in Defense of Water and Life read the letter to the Registrar.

This popular initiative started two years ago and has managed to join different local, regional and national initiatives in defense of water and life. The second period of collecting signatures started on March 14, 2008. It was a huge challenge; signatures corresponding to at least 5% of the people authorized to vote needed to be collected in six months, approximately 1.4 million signatures. During this six months it was necessary to go to the streets and rivers to carry out the task.

However, it wasn´t difficult to get the support of the people. How can someone oppose to water being considered a fundamental right? Who doesn´t want to protect strategic ecosystems? How can someone accept the threats of water privatization?

Finally, the task was carried out, the Colombian people answered the call for water. Every day, different people approached the tents located at big cities and the regional comittee in defense of water and life to join the campaign, to collect signatures and submit them. This was a way of stating "here we are and will be, we commit to water, to life and to the future of our children and grandchildren".

The National Registry will rule on this issue next month, so we are still alert to the challenges to the Referendum and the movement in defense of water and life. That small river born on February 14^th , 2007, is a huge river now, impossible to dam.

By Tatiana Roa Avendaño, www.censat.org.

ITALIA: Il modello Svizzera per l'Europa

Il modello Svizzera per l'Europa

di Lino Terlizzi

Fonte: http://www.ilsole24ore.com/art/SoleOnLine4/Mondo/2008/09/svizzera-modello-per-europa_2.shtml

Il «no» al Trattato europeo nel referendum irlandese del giugno scorso ha riaperto il dibattito sulle istituzioni dell'Unione Europea. Molti ora guardano alle misure della Ue per il rilancio del processo unitario. È possibile che i Paesi che costituiscono il nucleo centrale della Ue riescano in qualche modo a riattivare il processo di approvazione del Trattato, che rimane comunque complicato. Una reazione della Ue è in effetti opportuna. Ma sarebbe un errore non procedere contemporaneamente a una riflessione più profonda e di prospettiva, dopo i «no» degli elettori olandesi e francesi negli anni scorsi al progetto di Costituzione e dopo questo più recente «no» irlandese.

Volendo andare direttamente al punto centrale, si dovrebbe dire che hanno ragione quei commentatori, tra cui Norbert Walter, capo dell'Ufficio studi della Deutsche Bank, che consigliano di elvetizzare in una certa misura l'Unione Europea. Il riferimento alla Svizzera non è infondato e solo una storica insufficienza dei maggiori Paesi europei sul federalismo, favorita peraltro da un'altrettanto storica ritrosia elvetica, ha permesso sin qui l'assenza di un confronto concreto. È vero che la Svizzera non fa parte della Ue, ma la riflessione avviene sulle esperienze e non necessariamente sulle appartenenze. E poi la Confederazione elvetica ha rilevanti accordi bilaterali con la stessa Ue, a cui è vicina per geografia, economia, lingue.

In un'Unione Europea ormai a 27 i meccanismi decisionali di fondo dovranno cambiare, su questo molti sono d'accordo. Le difficoltà subentrano però quando si deve indicare una direzione di marcia. Considerando l'articolazione della realtà europea, appare ora ragionevole pensare a uno sviluppo federalista e non a ulteriori forme di accentramento. L'esperienza svizzera è rilevante per alcuni aspetti e uno emerge proprio sull'onda dei «no» nei referendum Ue: il binomio federalismo-democrazia diretta.

Per lasciarsi alle spalle sia il centralismo esasperato sia il localismo eccessivo, l'Unione Europea dovrebbe in effetti da un lato trovare forme decisionali al di fuori di un'unanimità ormai impossibile (come si fa a essere sempre d'accordo su tutto, quando si è in 27?) e su questo c'è un certo accordo almeno in teoria. Dall'altro, dovrebbe andare verso una ridefinizione dei poteri tra Ue e Stati aderenti, affiancata però dalla possibilità di indire referendum, anche come forma di bilanciamento a favore di realtà nazionali che potrebbero "subire" decisioni prese a maggioranza, seppure qualificata.

Detto questo, bisogna però precisare bene. Proprio l'esperienza elvetica, costruita in più di 700 anni, insegna che si può votare su tutto, ma seguendo una geografia precisa dei poteri decisionali. In Svizzera, nel concreto, un solo Cantone non può bloccare la Confederazione su una questione d'interesse nazionale o internazionale. Esistono referendum locali su questioni locali, referendum nazionali su questioni nazionali. Su alcuni capitoli di particolare rilievo, in Svizzera c'è la doppia maggioranza - dei votanti e dei Cantoni - che però è altra cosa, non è una sorta di diritto di veto locale come quello sin qui di fatto accordato a singoli Paesi della Ue.

I Paesi della Ue sono 27, i Cantoni della Confederazione sono 26. Se si paragonasse l'Irlanda a un Cantone elvetico, ebbene gli elettori irlandesi non avrebbero potuto fermare il Trattato europeo. Avrebbero avuto l'ultima parola su una questione riguardante solo l'Irlanda, questo sì, ma non su una questione di tutta la Ue. Se un capitolo riguarda l'intera Unione, allora dovrebbero essere tutti gli elettori della Ue a votare unitariamente, con maggioranza e minoranza a livello di Unione stessa. In caso di questioni molto rilevanti, come avviene in Svizzera, si potrebbe semmai definire per i referendum europei una doppia maggioranza, di elettori e di Stati. Garanzie per gli Stati non grandi e per le minoranze, non diritti di blocco a singoli Stati.

Certo, il binomio federalismo-democrazia diretta può far sorridere, può apparire utopico se rapportato alle dimensioni geografiche limitate della Svizzera e alle grandi difficoltà attuali della Ue. Anche la Ue stessa e l'euro erano però per molti utopie, all'inizio del cammino. Occorre trovare un percorso equilibrato, per uscire dalle secche in un quadro di decisioni democratiche. Non sembrano esservi molte alternative valide.

La Ue rispetto alla Svizzera ha una differenza e un tratto comune. La differenza è che la Ue è nata da alleanze economiche che si sono poi affacciate alla politica, mentre la Svizzera è nata da un'alleanza politica contro ingerenze esterne che si è poi tradotta anche in forza economica. Il tratto comune è il carattere costruttivo del federalismo, già realizzato in Svizzera e realizzabile da una Ue che decidesse di cambiare strada.

Al federalismo si può arrivare infatti sia con un percorso di "aggregazione" di realtà regionali o nazionali, sia con un percorso di "disaggregazione". Gli Stati Uniti presidenziali e la Svizzera parlamentare sono casi diversi, entrambi però di federalismo aggregante. Le autonomie accentuate accordate a regioni-Paesi della Spagna o della Gran Bretagna rappresentano invece casi di federalismo disaggreganti. Non si tratta di dare una connotazione positiva o negativa a un percorso o all'altro, l'importante è alla fine che siano riconosciuti i diritti delle popolazioni. In genere, però, il percorso aggregante ha oggettivamente qualche ostacolo in meno. Chi decide di fondare qualcosa e di mettersi insieme, pur rispettando le rispettive autonomie, lo può fare infatti contando su minori ostacoli. Chi deve ridefinire la propria partecipazione a uno Stato già consolidato incontra spesso maggiori difficoltà.

Il «no» al Trattato europeo nel referendum irlandese del giugno scorso ha riaperto il dibattito sulle istituzioni dell'Unione Europea. Molti ora guardano alle misure della Ue per il rilancio del processo unitario. È possibile che i Paesi che costituiscono il nucleo centrale della Ue riescano in qualche modo a riattivare il processo di approvazione del Trattato, che rimane comunque complicato. Una reazione della Ue è in effetti opportuna. Ma sarebbe un errore non procedere contemporaneamente a una riflessione più profonda e di prospettiva, dopo i «no» degli elettori olandesi e francesi negli anni scorsi al progetto di Costituzione e dopo questo più recente «no» irlandese.

Volendo andare direttamente al punto centrale, si dovrebbe dire che hanno ragione quei commentatori, tra cui Norbert Walter, capo dell'Ufficio studi della Deutsche Bank, che consigliano di elvetizzare in una certa misura l'Unione Europea. Il riferimento alla Svizzera non è infondato e solo una storica insufficienza dei maggiori Paesi europei sul federalismo, favorita peraltro da un'altrettanto storica ritrosia elvetica, ha permesso sin qui l'assenza di un confronto concreto. È vero che la Svizzera non fa parte della Ue, ma la riflessione avviene sulle esperienze e non necessariamente sulle appartenenze. E poi la Confederazione elvetica ha rilevanti accordi bilaterali con la stessa Ue, a cui è vicina per geografia, economia, lingue.

In un'Unione Europea ormai a 27 i meccanismi decisionali di fondo dovranno cambiare, su questo molti sono d'accordo. Le difficoltà subentrano però quando si deve indicare una direzione di marcia. Considerando l'articolazione della realtà europea, appare ora ragionevole pensare a uno sviluppo federalista e non a ulteriori forme di accentramento. L'esperienza svizzera è rilevante per alcuni aspetti e uno emerge proprio sull'onda dei «no» nei referendum Ue: il binomio federalismo-democrazia diretta.

Per lasciarsi alle spalle sia il centralismo esasperato sia il localismo eccessivo, l'Unione Europea dovrebbe in effetti da un lato trovare forme decisionali al di fuori di un'unanimità ormai impossibile (come si fa a essere sempre d'accordo su tutto, quando si è in 27?) e su questo c'è un certo accordo almeno in teoria. Dall'altro, dovrebbe andare verso una ridefinizione dei poteri tra Ue e Stati aderenti, affiancata però dalla possibilità di indire referendum, anche come forma di bilanciamento a favore di realtà nazionali che potrebbero "subire" decisioni prese a maggioranza, seppure qualificata.

Detto questo, bisogna però precisare bene. Proprio l'esperienza elvetica, costruita in più di 700 anni, insegna che si può votare su tutto, ma seguendo una geografia precisa dei poteri decisionali. In Svizzera, nel concreto, un solo Cantone non può bloccare la Confederazione su una questione d'interesse nazionale o internazionale. Esistono referendum locali su questioni locali, referendum nazionali su questioni nazionali. Su alcuni capitoli di particolare rilievo, in Svizzera c'è la doppia maggioranza - dei votanti e dei Cantoni - che però è altra cosa, non è una sorta di diritto di veto locale come quello sin qui di fatto accordato a singoli Paesi della Ue.

I Paesi della Ue sono 27, i Cantoni della Confederazione sono 26. Se si paragonasse l'Irlanda a un Cantone elvetico, ebbene gli elettori irlandesi non avrebbero potuto fermare il Trattato europeo. Avrebbero avuto l'ultima parola su una questione riguardante solo l'Irlanda, questo sì, ma non su una questione di tutta la Ue. Se un capitolo riguarda l'intera Unione, allora dovrebbero essere tutti gli elettori della Ue a votare unitariamente, con maggioranza e minoranza a livello di Unione stessa. In caso di questioni molto rilevanti, come avviene in Svizzera, si potrebbe semmai definire per i referendum europei una doppia maggioranza, di elettori e di Stati. Garanzie per gli Stati non grandi e per le minoranze, non diritti di blocco a singoli Stati.

Certo, il binomio federalismo-democrazia diretta può far sorridere, può apparire utopico se rapportato alle dimensioni geografiche limitate della Svizzera e alle grandi difficoltà attuali della Ue. Anche la Ue stessa e l'euro erano però per molti utopie, all'inizio del cammino. Occorre trovare un percorso equilibrato, per uscire dalle secche in un quadro di decisioni democratiche. Non sembrano esservi molte alternative valide.

La Ue rispetto alla Svizzera ha una differenza e un tratto comune. La differenza è che la Ue è nata da alleanze economiche che si sono poi affacciate alla politica, mentre la Svizzera è nata da un'alleanza politica contro ingerenze esterne che si è poi tradotta anche in forza economica. Il tratto comune è il carattere costruttivo del federalismo, già realizzato in Svizzera e realizzabile da una Ue che decidesse di cambiare strada.

Al federalismo si può arrivare infatti sia con un percorso di "aggregazione" di realtà regionali o nazionali, sia con un percorso di "disaggregazione". Gli Stati Uniti presidenziali e la Svizzera parlamentare sono casi diversi, entrambi però di federalismo aggregante. Le autonomie accentuate accordate a regioni-Paesi della Spagna o della Gran Bretagna rappresentano invece casi di federalismo disaggreganti. Non si tratta di dare una connotazione positiva o negativa a un percorso o all'altro, l'importante è alla fine che siano riconosciuti i diritti delle popolazioni. In genere, però, il percorso aggregante ha oggettivamente qualche ostacolo in meno. Chi decide di fondare qualcosa e di mettersi insieme, pur rispettando le rispettive autonomie, lo può fare infatti contando su minori ostacoli. Chi deve ridefinire la propria partecipazione a uno Stato già consolidato incontra spesso maggiori difficoltà.