Initiative

Last updated
Signature collection point at The Body Shop in Kluuvi shopping centre, Helsinki, for one of the first citizens' initiatives in Finland, about banning fur farming. Signature collection point . citizens initiative . ban fur farming . Finland.jpg
Signature collection point at The Body Shop in Kluuvi shopping centre, Helsinki, for one of the first citizens' initiatives in Finland, about banning fur farming.

In political science, an initiative (also known as a popular initiative or citizens' initiative) is a means by which a petition signed by a certain number of registered voters can force a government to choose either to enact a law or hold a public vote in the legislature in what is called indirect initiative, or under direct initiative, where the proposition is put to a plebiscite or referendum, in what is called a Popular initiated Referendum or citizen-initiated referendum.

Contents

In an indirect initiative, a measure is first referred to the legislature, and then put to a popular vote only if not enacted by the legislature. If the proposed law is rejected by the legislature, the government may be forced to put the proposition to a referendum. The initiative may then take the form of a direct initiative or an indirect initiative.

In a direct initiative, a measure is put directly to a referendum.

The vote may be on a proposed federal level, statute, constitutional amendment, charter amendment or local ordinance, or obligate the executive or legislature to consider the subject by submitting it to the order of the day. It is a form of direct democracy.

By type

Direct initiative

A direct initiative places an initiative measure directly on the ballot for voters to pass or reject. The measure is not submitted the legislature first


Indirect initiative

An indirect initiative is voted on by a legislature after sufficient signatures are collected from the voting population. In most areas the measure is submitted to a subsequent popular vote only if amended by the legislature.

Agenda setting initiative

An agenda setting initiative is a measure submitted by petition to a legislature for consideration. The legislature may choose to approve or reject the proposal without a public vote. [1] This form or initiative is more common than a legally binding direct or indirect initiative.

By country

Overview

National popular referendums by country
CountryTypeRequired
signatures
Restrictions / DetailsConditions of
validity
Result
(if valid)
Flag of Argentina.svg Argentina Legislative1,5% of the registered voters in at least 6 provincesNot authorised on matters relating to constitutional reforms, international treaties, taxes, budget and criminal matters.1,5% of the registered voters in at least 6 provincesThe initiative must be voted in favour or against by the Congress.
Flag of Albania.svg Albania Abrogative 50,000
(≈1,5% of the registrants in 2017)
Constitutionality review. Prohibited against laws relating to the integrity of the territory of the Republic of North Macedonia, fundamental human rights and freedoms, the budget, taxes, the financial obligations of the State, declarations of establishment and termination of the state of emergency, declarations of war and peace, as well as amnesty lawsAbsolute majority
+ one third of the registrants in favour
Binding
Bandera de Bolivia (Estado).svg Bolivia Legislative20% of the registrants + 15% in each of the nine departments of Bolivia Not authorized on subjects relating to the unity and integrity of Bolivia's territory, human rights, taxes, the country's internal and external security, the drafting of laws, the organization of institutions responsible for the protection of society and national defence, the nature of the state and its relations with decentralized entities.Absolute majorityRestricted
Ratification
of a treaty
5% of the registrantsSuspends ratification of the treaty in the meantime.
Constitutional20% of the registrantsOnly once per concurrent term of office of the meeting and the president, which is five years.
Flag of Bulgaria.svg Bulgaria Legislative400,000 in three months
(≈5,7 % of the registrants in 2017)
Not authorised on matters relating to Articles 84, 91, 103, 103, 130, 132 and 147 of the Constitution, taxes, duties, taxes and contributions to social security, the state budget, the internal organisation of the National Assembly, the entirety of a code of law and international treaties, if they have already been ratified.Absolute majority
+ Higher participation than in recent legislative elections
Binding
Flag of Colombia.svg Colombia Abrogative10% of the registrants in six monthsNot allowed against laws relating to the state budget, taxation, as well as the ratification of international treaties.Absolute majority
+ 25% participation
Binding
Flag of Costa Rica.svg Costa Rica Legislative5 % of the registrants in nine monthsOnly once a year
Banned in the six months before and after a presidential election
Not allowed on matters relating to the budget, taxation, monetary matters, pensions and public contracts and administrative acts.
Absolute majority
+ 30% participation
Binding
Abrogative
ConstitutionalAbsolute majority of votes
+ 40% participation
Flag of Croatia.svg Croatia Legislative10% of the registrants within two weeksConstitutionality review by the Constitutional Court if requested by the Parliament.Absolute majorityBinding
Abrogative
Constitutional
Flag of Ecuador.svg Ecuador Legislative5 % of enrollees in six monthsConstitutionality review. Unauthorized on matters relating to taxation and the political and administrative structure of the state.Absolute majorityBinding
Abrogative
Revocatory15% of the registrants in six monthsUnlike the president. May only be convened once during his term of office. Cannot be done in the first or last year of the mandate.Absolute majority of all valid, blank and invalid votes
Constitutional8% of the registrants in six monthsConstitutionality review. May not have as its object a change in the nature of the state or its decentralized elements, affect the rights guaranteed by the constitution, or change the procedure for amending the constitutionAbsolute majority
Constituent12% of the registrants in six monthsConvene a constituent assembly. The proposal must include the voting system that will be used to elect or select the members of the constituency as well as the general framework of the electoral process. The new constitution prepared by the constituent assembly will in turn have to be put to a referendum.
Flag of Hungary.svg Hungary Legislative200,000
(≈2,5 % of the registrants in 2018)
Authorised only in areas falling within the scope of the National Assembly, from which projects relating to constitutional amendments, the State budget, national taxes, pension or health insurance contributions, customs duties and general rules on local taxes are also excluded, national and local electoral systems, international treaties, the dissolution of the National Assembly or local assemblies, the declaration of a state of war, a state of siege or a state of emergency, as well as the proclamation and extension of a state of preventive defence, military operations and amnesty laws.Absolute majority
+ 50% participation
Binding
Abrogative
Flag of Italy.svg Italy Abrogative500,000
(≈1 % of the registrants in 2018)
Constitutionality review. Not allowed against laws relating to taxation, budget, amnesty, remission of sentences and ratification of international treaties.Absolute majority
+ 50% participation
Binding
Flag of Kenya.svg Kenya Constitutional1,000,000
(≈5,1 % of the registrants in 2017)
Requires the support of at least one of the 47 county assemblies if the proposal does not address the supremacy of the constitution over any other law, territorial integrity, popular sovereignty, national values and principles of governance referred to in Article 10, the Bill of Rights, the mandate of the President, the independence of the judiciary, the powers of parliament, the structure of decentralized entities and the same procedure for constitutional reviewAbsolute majority
+ 50% participation in at least half of the counties
Binding
Flag of Latvia.svg Latvia Legislative10% of the registrantsNot authorized on matters relating to the state budget, taxes, duties, duties, loans and obligations, railway tariffs, military conscription, declarations of war, peace treaties, declaration of the beginning and end of the state of emergency, mobilization and demobilization, as well as international treaties. The parliament may decide to adopt the popular proposal itself, in which case the referendum does not take place.Absolute majority
+ Higher participation than in recent legislative elections
Binding
ConstitutionalAbsolute majority
+ 50% participation
Flag of Liechtenstein.svg Liechtenstein Legislative1,000 in six weeks
(≈5 % of the registrants in 2017)
None. However, the parliament may decide to vote the bill itself, in which case the referendum does not take place.Absolute majorityBinding
Abrogative 1,000 in thirty daysThis includes any legislative change, new one-time expenditure of more than 500,000 Swiss Francs or new annual expenditure of more than 250,000 Swiss Francs. The implementation of the referendum suspends their application at least until the results are promulgated.
Constitutional1,500 in six weeks
(≈7,5% of enrolments in 2017)
None. However, the parliament may decide to vote for the amendment itself by two thirds of its total membership, in which case the referendum shall not take place. The deadline is thirty days if the referendum is intended to prevent a constitutional revision initiated by parliament. Also concerns international treaties and their ratification.
Flag of Lithuania.svg Lithuania Legislative300,000
(≈12 % of the registrants in 2016)
Authorized only in matters within the scope of the meeting, the Seimas.Absolute majority
+1/3 of the registrants in favour
+ 50% participation
Binding
Flag of Malta.svg Malta Abrogative10% of the registrantsConstitutionality review. Prohibited against all or part of the Constitution as well as areas related to the treaties of the European Union or other international treaties, electoral law, tax legislation, as well as the organization of decentralized entities.Absolute majority
+ 50% participation
Binding
Flag of the Marshall Islands.svg Marshall Islands Constituent25% of the registrantsIt concerns the convening of a Constitutional Convention to study the popular proposal to amend the Constitution.Absolute majorityBinding
Flag of Mexico.svg Mexico Legislative2% of the registrants in two yearsAuthorized only in areas under the jurisdiction of the Mexican Congress and deemed to be of "national importance", which is defined by law as having an impact on most of the country's territory and population. In addition, projects relating to a restriction of human rights enshrined in the Constitution, Article 40 defining the country as a representative, democratic, federal, free and sovereign republic and subjects relating to electoral law, the state budget, the organisation of national security and that of the army and its operations are excluded. The Supreme Court of Justice may rule on the constitutionality of the referendum proposal if the Congress so requests.Absolute majority
+ 40% participation
Binding
Abrogative
Flag of Federated States of Micronesia.svg Micronesia Constitutional10% of the registrants in at least 3 of the 4 states.If several contradictory amendments are adopted simultaneously, the one with the most votes shall prevail.75% qualified majority in at least 3 of the 4 statesBinding
Flag of New Zealand.svg New Zealand Legislative10% of the registrants in twelve monthsN/AAbsolute majorityNon binding
Flag of North Macedonia.svg North Macedonia Legislative150,000
(≈8 % of the registrants in 2016)
Authorised only in areas falling within the scope of the Assembly.Absolute majority
+ 50% participation
Binding
Abrogative
Flag of Palau.svg Palaos Legislative10% of the registrantsAuthorized only in areas under the jurisdiction of the Federal Parliament. Must be held at the same time as the general elections, which are held every four years.Absolute majorityBinding
Abrogative
Constitutional25% of the registrantsMust be held at the same time as the general elections, which are held every four years.Absolute majority in at least 12 of the 16 [states of Palau].
Flag of Peru.svg Peru Legislative10% of the registrantsExcluded are projects relating to the restriction of fundamental rights of the individual, tax and budgetary matters, as well as international treaties already in force. In the event of a valid and favourable result, the parliament may only amend the law or the amendment once a period of two years has passed, except by holding a new referendum or by a two-thirds vote. In the event of a negative or invalid result, a new popular initiative cannot be implemented on the same subject as two years later.Absolute majority
+ 30% of the registrants in favour
Binding
Abrogative
Constitutional
Flag of the Philippines.svg Philippines Legislative10% of the registrants + 3% in each of the legislative districts The following topics cannot be passed via initiative:
  • Petitions with more than one subject
  • Emergency measures
Absolute majorityBinding
Abrogative
Constitutional12% of the registrants + 3% in each of the legislative districts Can only be initiated by the population once every five years, and for amendments only and not wholesale revisions.
Flag of San Marino.svg San Marino Legislative1.5% of the registrants in 45 daysAuthorized in areas under the purview of Parliament, excluding projects against constitutional provisions, those relating to the state budget, taxes and taxation, amnesties, the right to vote, the right to work, freedom of movement and any other violation or restriction of human rights, as well as the ratification of international treatiesAbsolute majority
+ 32% of the registrants in favour
Binding
Abrogative1.5% of the registrants in 90 days
Flag of Serbia.svg Serbia Legislative100,000 in seven days
(≈1,5% of the registrants in 2016)
Authorized only in areas within the competence of the National Assembly, to which projects relating to international treaties, human rights and freedoms, minority rights, tax legislation, the state budget, the declaration of a state of emergency, amnesty laws and the assembly's electoral law are also excludedAbsolute majority
+ 50% participation
Binding
Abrogative
Flag of Slovakia.svg Slovakia Legislative350,000
(≈8 % of the registrants in 2016)
Constitutionality review by the Constitutional Court if the President so requests. Not allowed in areas relating to fundamental rights and freedoms, taxes and the state budget. In the event of a valid and favourable result, the law may only be amended by parliament or be the subject of a new referendum once a period of three years has passed.Absolute majority
+ 50% participation
Binding
Abrogative
Constitutional
Flag of Slovenia.svg Slovenia Abrogative2,500 then 40,000 in one month
(≈2,3 % of the registrants in 2017)
Not authorized against laws relating to the integrity of the territory of the Republic of Macedonia, fundamental human rights and freedoms, budget, taxes, financial obligations of the State, declarations of establishment and termination of the state of emergency, declarations of war and peace, as well as amnesty lawsAbsolute majority
+ 20% of the registrants in favour
Binding
Flag of Switzerland.svg Switzerland Abrogative 50,000 in one hundred days
(≈ 0,9% of the registrants in 2018)
Applies to the introduction and revision of laws. The 100-day period runs from the date of its publication in the Federal Gazette . Can also be triggered by eight cantons of the twenty-six of the country.Absolute majorityBinding
Constitutional100,000 in eighteen months
(≈ 1,8% of the registrants in 2018)
The proposal may be drafted in such a way as to be ready for adoption, or made in general terms, in which case the petitioners leave it to Parliament to draft.Absolute majority if in general terms
Majority of voters and cantons if proposal drafted
Flag of the Republic of China.svg Taiwan Legislative0.01% then 1,5% of the registrants in six monthsMust be validated by the Central Election Commission (CEC). Proposals to amend the Constitution and the name, national anthem, flag and borders of the country are excluded. While the electoral law exceptionally lowers the right to vote from 20 to 18 years of age in these referendums, they are also explicitly prohibited from changing the legal age of voting rightsAbsolute majority
+ 25% of the registrants in favour
Binding
Abrogative
Flag of Uruguay.svg Uruguay Abrogative25% of the registrantsNot allowed against decisions concerning the state budget, as well as areas within the presidential prerogativesAbsolute majority
+ 25% of the registrants in favour
Binding
Constitutional10% of the registrantsThe parliament may propose a counter-proposal, which will be submitted to a vote at the same time as the popular proposal.Absolute majority
+ 35% of the registrants in favour
Binding
Flag of Venezuela.svg Venezuela Legislative10% of the registrantsConsultative referendums. The following can also be organised at the level of municipalities and States of Venezuela Absolute majorityNon Binding
Abrogative"Law": 10% of the registrants, "Decree": 5%.Not authorized against laws relating to the budget, those establishing or amending taxes, or relating to credit, amnesty, human rights and international treaties. May only be organised once on the same subject for each five-year term of office of the meeting.Absolute majority
+ 40% participation
Binding
Revocatory20% of the registrantsAgainst the president or any other elected official. May only be convened once during his term of office, once the first half of his term has expired.A higher number of votes for dismissal than the one obtained by the President at the time of his election
+ 25% of participation
Ratification
of a treaty
15% of the registrantsSuspends ratification of the treaty in the meantime.Absolute majority
ConstitutionalThe draft constitutional amendment may be submitted in its entirety to a referendum, or be the subject of separate questions if the President, one third of the parliament or 5% of the voters so request. May only be organised once per five-year term of office of the meeting.
ConstituentConvene a constituent assembly. The new constitution prepared by the constituent assembly will in turn have to be put to a referendum.

Americas

Brazil

In Brazil, a popular law initiative requires two conditions be met before it is sent to the National Congress: signatures from at least 1% of national registered voters and at least 0.3% of the people allowed to vote from each of at least five of the 27 federal unities (the 26 states plus the federal district). If both conditions are met, Congress is obliged to discuss and vote on holding the initiative.

Canada

British Columbia

The Canadian province of British Columbia has a citizen initiative law known as the Recall and Initiative Act. [2] The original proposal was put to voters in a referendum held in October 1991 and was supported by over 83% of voters. It was subsequently put into force by the incoming NDP government. Since it came into force in 1995, 11 attempts have been made to force the government to either adopt a law or to hold a referendum on the question, but only one has succeeded. Only one secured the required signatures of 10% of registered voters in each riding throughout British Columbia. Due to this achievement the government held the first referendum under this legislation, in September 2011 on the subject of repealing the Harmonized Sales Tax. Details of its use in BC are available on the Elections BC website. [3]

United States

In the United States, a popular vote on a measure is referred to as a referendum only when aiming at allowing or repealing an act passed by a state legislature. An initiative may be called a "ballot measure", "initiative measure", or "proposition".[ citation needed ]

The United States has no initiative process at the national level, but the initiative is in use at the level of state government in 24 states and the District of Columbia, [4] and is also in common use at the local government level.

Article I, Section I of the United States Constitution vests "all legislative powers herein granted" to the Congress of the United States. [5] Establishing a national initiative procedure would likely require an amendment to the Constitution, which would under Article V require two-thirds of both houses of Congress or the application of two-thirds of the state legislatures to propose, and three-fourths of all state legislatures (or conventions in three-fourths of the states) to ratify. The Constitution itself, pursuant to Article VII, was ratified by state conventions rather than by a referendum.

Several proposals have been made to institute a national referendum. The Ludlow Amendment, introduced several times to the House of Representatives by Louis Ludlow of Indiana between 1935 and 1940, proposed an amendment to the Constitution that would require a national referendum to declare war except in the case of invasion or attack. The amendment came closest to overcoming a discharge petition on January 10, 1938, when it was defeated in the House by a vote of 209 to 188, short of the two-thirds vote required for its passage.

Unsuccessful attempts to get initiatives have nevertheless occurred, but since the proposals were bills, not constitutional amendments, no initiative could probably have lawfully been voted on notwithstanding the bills' passage. The first attempt to get national ballot initiatives occurred in 1907 when House Joint Resolution 44 was introduced by Rep. Elmer Fulton of Oklahoma; the proposal was never put to a vote. In 1977, both the Abourezk-Hatfield National Voter Initiative and the Jagt Resolutions never got out of committee. Senator Mike Gravel was part of that effort.

The modern system of initiatives and referendums in the United States originated in the state of South Dakota, which adopted initiatives and referendums in 1898 by a popular vote of 23,816 to 16,483. Oregon was the second state to adopt and did so in 1902, when the Oregon Legislative Assembly adopted it by an overwhelming majority. The "Oregon System," as it was at first known, subsequently spread to many other states, and became one of the signature reforms of the Progressive Era (1890s-1920s). Almost every state currently in the union utilizes some sort of State Question or Initiative. A contemporary issue that is commonly decided through this method is the legalization of marijuana.

Asia

Philippines

People's initiative to propose amendments to the constitution is enshrined in the 1987 Philippine Constitution under Article XVII Section 2, which states:

Amendments to this Constitution may likewise be directly proposed by the people through initiative upon a petition of at least twelve per centum of the total number of registered voters, of which every legislative district must be represented by at least three per centum of the registered voters therein. No amendment under this section shall be authorized within five years following the ratification of this Constitution nor oftener than once every five years thereafter.

This provision is further protected by Republic Act 6735 or The Initiative and Referendum Act. [6] The law defines initiative as:

  1. A petition to propose amendments to the constitution.
  2. A petition to propose enactment of national legislation.
  3. A petition to propose enactment of local resolution or ordinance on regional, provincial, city, municipal, or barangay level.

The law also provides indirect initiative defining the exercise of people's initiative through a proposition sent to congress or local legislative body for action.

Europe

European Union

The rejected Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe (TCE) included a limited indirect initiative right (Article I-46(4)). The proposal of introducing the European Citizens' Initiative (ECI) was that 1,000,000 citizens, from minimal numbers of different member states, could invite the executive body of the European Union (EU), the European Commission, to consider any proposal "on matters where citizens consider that a legal act of the Union is required for the purpose of implementing the Constitution." The precise mechanism had not been agreed upon. Critics underlined the weakness of this right of initiative, which did not ultimately entail any vote or referendum.

A similar scheme under the same name, European Citizens' Initiative (ECI), has been put forward in the now ratified European Lisbon Treaty (which entered into force on 1 December 2009), enabling a limited indirect initiative right. [7] It follows very similar rules to the ones outlined in the European Constitution, requiring the signatures of 1,000 000 European Nationals. These citizens would thereby obtain the same right to request the Commission to submit a legislative proposal as the Council has had since the establishment of the European Communities in 1957. [8] This, however, does require that the signatures come from a "significant number" of Member States. It is suggested that this significant number will need to be around a quarter of member states, with at least 1/500 of the citizens in those member states supporting the initiative. With the variety of languages within the European Union, this creates a significant hurdle for people to navigate. The treaty also makes it clear that right of initiative should not be confused with the right to petition, particularly since a petition is directed to Parliament [9] while a citizens' initiative is directed to the Commission; whereas a petition is a method of remonstrance, usually focussing on perceived infringements of European Law, an initiative is a grassroots proposal for new legislation. In 2013 the subjects of ongoing open initiatives of the European Citizens' Initiative are e.g. about "water and sanitation as a human right" (against Water privatization), "30 km/h - making the streets liveable!" (Traffic calming in towns), "Unconditional Basic Income" (UBI - Exploring a pathway towards emancipatory welfare conditions), or to "End Ecocide in Europe" (to give the Earth Rights). [10]

It remains to be seen if the ECI evolves into a full initiative or remains in its present state of a de facto petition. [11] [12]

Finland

Since 1 March 2012, groups of at least 50,000  Finnish citizens with suffrage have had the constitutional right to send a citizens' initiative (Finnish: kansalaisaloite, Swedish: medborgarinitiativ) to the Parliament of Finland. The Parliament is entitled to address and discuss each initiative and the possibilities of them becoming new laws. The first initiative to pass the 50,000 mark did so already a few months after the "kansalaisaloite" first became possible. The initiative demanded the ending of fur industry in Finland, but failed to pass in Parliament. The first initiative to be accepted by the Parliament was the citizens' initiative known in Finland as "Equal Marriages Law", which is also known by its campaign slogan, #Tahdon2013 (#IDo2013). This initiative was accepted by the Parliament during the 2011-2015 parliamentary session, though political debate, decision-making and drafting of the new law continued on to the next parliamentary session. The new law took effect on 1 March 2017 [13] [ circular reference ]. To date, a total of 24 citizens' initiatives have reached the 50,000 mark, with 20 of them having been either rejected or accepted in Parliament - so far, only two have been accepted: the aforementioned "Equal Marriages Law" and the "Motherhood Law" from 2015/16 [14] [ circular reference ]. [15] [16]

France

A limited, indirect form of local initiative was added to the French Constitution (article 72-1, référendum d'initiative locale) on 28 March 2003 as part of decentralization reforms. However, the only power these "local referendum initiatives" confer on citizens is the ability to add propositions to their local assembly's meeting agenda. The decision as to whether to submit citizen propositions to a popular vote (referendum) rests with the local assembly. A citizens' initiative referendum was proposed by the yellow vests movement. Citizens are able to submit a law project to the parliament through the "Référendum d'Initiative Partagée"; they can ask for a referendum if they meet the 185 deputies requirement and the signatures of at least 10% of the voting population.

Germany

All German states have the right to initiative. [17] However, there is no constitutional citizens' initiative in Germany at a federal level.

Ireland

The Constitution of Ireland, since its 1937 enactment, has never made provision for initiatives. [18] Since 2012, the Oireachtas (parliament) has a joint committee to which the public can submit petitions; [19] the committee must formally consider them but need not accept them. [20] [21] [22] In May–June 2013, when the Constitutional Convention considered Dáil electoral reform, members voted 83:16 in favour of allowing "citizens' initiatives" in general, [23] 80:19 to allow them specifically for legislation, [24] and 78:17 to allow them for constitutional amendments. [24] In April 2015, the Fine Gael–Labour government rejected the recommendations on the basis that there is sufficient public involvement in legislation through the petitions committee and the pre-legislative scrutiny process. [20]

Article 48 of the 1922 Constitution of the Irish Free State gave a right of initiative: if more than 50,000 voters demanded a change in law, the Oireachtas had two years to enact it, failing which 75,000 voters could petition for a referendum. [25] [18] The only attempt to invoke this was organised in 1927 by Fianna Fáil, the largest opposition party, which sought to abolish the Oath of Allegiance. By May 1928 Fianna Fáil claimed 96,000 signatures and attempted to have the petition laid before the Dáil (lower house). The motion was deferred, ostensibly to allow the Dáil procedure committee to define the method of dealing with such petitions. [26] Before the committee could meet, the Cumann na nGaedheal government rushed through an amendment deleting Article 48 of the Constitution. [27] [28] [29] [30]

Poland

Citizens' legislative initiatives are a constitutional right in Poland, defined in Article 118, paragraph 2, of the 1997 Polish Constitution. The paragraph gives legislative initiative to any group of at least 100,000 citizens with voting rights to the Sejm, the lower house of Polish parliament. The detailed procedure is defined in a law dated 24 June 1999. [31]

Under Article 5 of the 24 June 1999 law, citizens wishing to launch an initiative must create a committee of at least 15 members, which becomes a legal person. The committee must prepare the draft bill and collect at least 100,000 signatures (Article 2). Under Article 12 of the law, if there is "justified doubt regarding the authenticity of the required number of signatures of citizens, then within 14 days of the lodging of the list of signatures, the Marshal of the Sejm must request the National Electoral Commission to verify the signatures. The electoral commission has 21 days to carry out the verification. [31]

One of the best known citizens' initiatives in Poland is the pair of 2015/2016 anti-abortion and pro-abortion initiatives which were accompanied by the Black Protest marches coordinated by women's rights groups. [32]

Romania

According to Article 74 of the Romanian Constitution, [33] groups of at least 100,000 Romanian Citizens with suffrage that reside in at least one quarter of all the counties and with a minimum 5,000 signatures per county have the right to send a Citizens' Initiative which must be considered by the legislative body (Initiatives that address fiscal or international matters are not covered by this right). If the initiative concerns changing the Constitution, Article 150 of the Constitution [34] states that the group must include at least 500,000 Romanian Citizens with suffrage who reside in at least half of all the counties, with a minimum of 20,000 per county. Article 151 of the Constitution [35] also states that any amendments brought to it, must be also approved by means of a National Referendum.

Switzerland

The federal popular initiative was included in the Swiss Federal Constitution in 1891, permitting a certain number of citizens (currently 100,000 signatures within 18 months [36] ) to make a request to amend a constitutional article, or even to introduce a new article into the constitution. The right of initiative is also used at the cantonal and communal level in Switzerland (all cantons, all communes where the direct democratic citizens' participation originates); many cantons allow initiatives to enact regular non-constitutional law, but the federal system does not.

If the necessary number of supporters is reached, the initiative will be put to a plebiscite about two or three years later; the delay helps prevent short-term political moods from getting into the constitution. The parliament and government will both issue their official opinions on whether they recommend voting for or against the proposed amendment, and these opinions will be published.

The parliament may also pass an alternative amendment suggestion which will also be included on the ballot; in this case, the voters cast two votes, one for whether or not they want an amendment, and one for which one they want, the original one from the initiative or the one introduced in parliament, in case a majority decides for amending.

A citizen-proposed change to the constitution in Switzerland at the national level needs to achieve both a majority of the national popular vote and a majority of the canton-wide vote to pass. The vast majority of national initiatives introduced since 1891, when the system started, have failed to receive voter support. But the initiatives have proven to be a useful tool to force the government to concentrate on subjects that will otherwise remain hidden from the politic, lowering the distance between the government and the citizens.

United Kingdom

While there is no mandate for a referendum following directly from such an initiative, the UK government has a system whereby citizens can set up online petitions, which are considered by a committee. Any petition which reaches 10,000 signatures triggers a response from the government and those which reach 100,000 signatures will almost always require the government to consider holding a debate (with some exceptions, such as whether a similar issue has been debated recently, or a debate for that issue is scheduled) on the matter in the House of Commons. Only British Citizens or individuals resident in the UK are allowed to start a petition or be a signatory. Petitions can be initiated via a specialist website, which also contains guidance on when petitions will, and will not, be debated. On occasion, some petitions which are signed by fewer than 100,000 people are still debated. [37] Examples of issues which have been debated in parliament via this system are various issues surrounding the UK withdrawal from the EU and a petition calling for United States President Donald Trump's state visit to UK to be cancelled. [38]

Oceania

New Zealand

In New Zealand a vote initiated by the public is called a citizen initiated referendum. These are non-binding referendums on any issue in which proponents have submitted a petition to Parliament signed by ten percent of all registered electors within 12 months.

See also

Related Research Articles

Direct democracy Form of democracy where people decide on policy without proxy representatives

Direct democracy or pure democracy is a form of democracy in which the electorate decides on policy initiatives without legislative representatives as proxies. This differs from the majority of currently established democracies, which are representative democracies. The theory and practice of direct democracy and participation as its common characteristic was the core of work of many theorists, philosophers, politicians, and social critics, among whom the most important are Jean Jacques Rousseau, John Stuart Mill, and G.D.H. Cole.

A recall election is a procedure by which, in certain polities, voters can remove an elected official from office through a referendum before that official's term of office has ended. Recalls, which are initiated when sufficient voters sign a petition, have a history dating back to the constitution in ancient Athenian democracy and feature in several current constitutions. In indirect or representative democracy, people's representatives are elected and these representatives serve for a specific period of time. However, where the facility to recall exists, if any representative comes to be perceived as not properly discharging their responsibilities, they can be called back with the written request of a specific number or proportion of voters. Even where they are legally available, recall elections are only commonly held in a small number of countries including the United States, Peru, Ecuador, and Japan. They are considered by groups such as ACE Electoral Knowledge Network the most rarely used form of direct democracy.

Constitution of the Irish Free State

The Constitution of the Irish Free State was adopted by Act of Dáil Éireann sitting as a constituent assembly on 25 October 1922. In accordance with Article 83 of the Constitution, the Irish Free State Constitution Act 1922 of the British Parliament, which came into effect upon receiving the royal assent on 5 December 1922, provided that the Constitution would come into effect upon the issue of a Royal Proclamation, which was done on 6 December 1922. In 1937 the Constitution of the Irish Free State was replaced by the modern Constitution of Ireland following a referendum.

A constitutional amendment is a modification of the constitution of a polity, organization or other type of entity. Amendments are often interwoven into the relevant sections of an existing constitution, directly altering the text. Conversely, they can be appended to the constitution as supplemental additions, thus changing the frame of government without altering the existing text of the document.

A supermajority, supra-majority, qualified majority, or special majority is a requirement for a proposal to gain a specified level of support which is greater than the threshold of more than one-half used for a majority. Supermajority rules in a democracy can help to prevent a majority from eroding fundamental rights of a minority. Changes to constitutions, especially those with entrenched clauses, commonly require supermajority support in a legislature. Parliamentary procedure requires that any action of a deliberative assembly that may alter the rights of a minority have a supermajority requirement, such as a two-thirds vote.

The Ninth Amendment of the Constitution Act 1984 is an amendment to the Constitution of Ireland that allowed for the extension of the right to vote in elections to Dáil Éireann to non-Irish citizens. It was approved by referendum on 14 June 1984, the same day as the European Parliament election, and signed into law on 2 August of the same year.

An ordinary referendum in Ireland is a referendum on a bill other than a bill to amend the Constitution. The Constitution prescribes the process in Articles 27 and 47. Whereas a constitutional referendum is mandatory for a constitutional amendment bill, an ordinary referendum occurs only if the bill "contains a proposal of such national importance that the will of the people thereon ought to be ascertained". This is decided at the discretion of the President, after a petition by Oireachtas members including a majority of Senators. No such petition has ever been presented, and thus no ordinary referendum has ever been held.

A double majority is a voting system which requires a majority of votes according to two separate criteria. The mechanism is usually used to require strong support for any measure considered to be of great importance. Typically in legislative bodies, a double majority requirement exists in the form of a quorum being necessary for legislation to be passed.

California ballot proposition Statewide referendum item in California

In California, a ballot proposition is a referendum or an initiative measure that is submitted to the electorate for a direct decision or direct vote. If passed, it can alter one or more of the articles of the Constitution of California, one or more of the 29 California Codes, or another law in the California Statutes by clarifying current or adding statute(s) or removing current statute(s).

In the politics of the United States, the process of initiatives and referendums allow citizens of many U.S. states to place new legislation, or to place legislation that has recently been passed by a legislature on a ballot for a popular vote. Initiatives and referendums, along with recall elections and popular primary elections, are signature reforms of the Progressive Era; they are written into several state constitutions, particularly in the West. It is a form of direct democracy.

The right of (legislative) initiative is the constitutionally defined power to propose a new law (bill).

National initiative Organization

the National initiative is a proposed process to petition an initiative at the federal level in the United States via a national vote on the national ballot measure. While some U.S. states allow direct or indirect initiatives, there are currently no national initiatives in the United States.

Arizona ballot proposition

A ballot proposition in the state of Arizona refers to any legislation brought before the voters of the state for approval.

Constitution of Colorado

The Constitution of the State of Colorado is the foundation of the laws and government of the U.S. state of Colorado. The current, and only, Colorado State Constitution was drafted on March 14, 1876; approved by Colorado voters on July 1, 1876; and took effect upon the statehood of Colorado on August 1, 1876. As of 2020, the constitution has been amended at least 166 times. The Constitution of Colorado derives its authority from the sovereignty of the people. As such, the people of Colorado reserved specific powers in governing Colorado directly; in addition to providing for voting for Governor, state legislators, and judges, the people of Colorado have reserved initiative of laws and referendum of laws enacted by the legislature to themselves, provided for recall of office holders, and limit tax increases beyond set amounts without explicit voter approval, and must explicitly approve any change to the constitution, often with a 55% majority. The Colorado state constitution is one of the longest in the United States.

Buckley v. American Constitutional Law Foundation, Inc., 525 U.S. 182 (1999), was a United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the authority of states to regulate the electoral process, and the point at which state regulations of the electoral process violate the First Amendment freedoms.

1911 California Proposition 7 Amendment to the Constitution of California adding the initiative and optional referendum

Proposition 7 of 1911 was an amendment of the Constitution of California that introduced, for the first time, the initiative and the optional referendum. Prior to 1911 the only form of direct democracy in California was the compulsory referendum.

The history of direct democracy amongst non-Native Americans in the United States dates from the 1630s in the New England Colonies. Many New England towns still carry on that tradition in the form of open town meetings.

A referendum is a direct vote in which an entire electorate is asked to either accept or reject a particular proposal. This article summarises referendum laws and practice in various countries.

Citizens initiative referendum (France)

The Référendum d'initiative Citoyenne is the name given to the proposal for a constitutional amendment in France to permit consultation of the citizenry by referendum concerning the proposition or abrogation of laws, the revocation of politicians' mandates, and constitutional amendment.

Massachusetts has several forms of direct democracy, allowing for initiative and referendums at the state level and in many municipalities. The recall of public officials is also provided for in many municipalities.

References

Sources

Citations

  1. "Agenda (setting) initiative - Navigator". www.direct-democracy-navigator.org. Retrieved 2021-04-14.
  2. "Table of Contents - Recall and Initiative Act". Bclaws.ca. Retrieved 2012-09-14.
  3. "Initiative | Elections BC". Elections.bc.ca. Retrieved 2012-09-14.
  4. "State by state listing of where initiatives and referendums are used". Iandrinstitute.org. Archived from the original on 2016-02-11. Retrieved 2011-01-31.
  5. United States Constitution, Article I, Section I
  6. Joselito Guianan Chan, Managing Partner, Chan Robles & Associates Law Firm (1989-08-04). "Philippine Laws, Statutes And Codes - Chan Robles Virtual Law Library". Chanrobles.com. Retrieved 2012-09-14.CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  7. cs - čeština. "Texts adopted - Thursday, 7 May 2009 - Implementation of the citizens' initiative - P6_TA-PROV(2009)0389". Europarl.europa.eu. Retrieved 2012-09-14.
  8. "Parliament : Petitions". Europarl.europa.eu. 2000-12-18. Retrieved 2012-09-14.
  9. Open initiatives at the European Citizens' Initiative official register of The European Commission (often translated in EU-languages). Retrieved 2013-09-05.
  10. "European Citizens' Initiative on the European Commission's web". Ec.europa.eu. Retrieved 2012-09-14.
  11. European Citizens' Initiative on the initiator's web:
    citizens-initiative.eu
    democracy-international.org/eci.html
  12. Same-sex marriage in Finland
  13. fi:Kansalaisaloite
  14. "Citizens' initiatives in Finland". Ministry of Justice of Finland. Archived from the original on 2013-06-02. Retrieved 2013-03-20.
  15. Note: the text is an unofficial translation used by the Ministry of Justice of Finland.
  16. "Volksbegehrensbericht 2019" (PDF) (in German). Mehr Demokratie. p. 12. Retrieved 2021-05-29.
  17. 1 2 Constitutional Convention 2013; §5.3.2 "Background"
  18. Barry, Aoife (14 September 2012). "How does the new public petitions system work?". TheJournal.ie . Retrieved 19 December 2016.
  19. 1 2 "Written Answer No.225: Constitutional Convention Recommendations". Dáil Éireann debates. Oireachtas. 21 April 2015. p. 56. Retrieved 30 October 2015.
  20. "Joint Committee on Public Petitions". Oireachtas. Retrieved 19 December 2016.
  21. "Public petitions". Ireland: Citizens Information Board. 10 October 2016. Retrieved 19 December 2016.
  22. Constitutional Convention 2013; §2 Question 9
  23. 1 2 Constitutional Convention 2013; §2 Question 10
  24. "Constitution of the Irish Free State (Saorstát Eireann) Act, 1922, Schedule 1". Irish Statute Book . Article 48. Retrieved 19 December 2016.
  25. Dáil Éireann debates (1928) Vol.28: 16 May cc1498–1532, 18 May cc1721–70, 23 May cc1898–1926, 1 June cc2519–47.
  26. "Constitution (Amendment No. 10) Bill, 1928—Second Stage". Dáil Éireann Debates. 15 June 1928. pp. Vol.24 No.6 p.3 cc694–721. Retrieved 19 December 2016.
  27. Hogan, Gerard (2012). "Chapter One". The Origins of the Irish Constitution, 1928-1941. Documents editor Eoin Kinsella. Royal Irish Academy. ISBN   9781904890751.
  28. Mansergh, Nicholas (2007) [1934]. "The Referendum and the Initiative". The Irish Free State - Its Government and Politics. Read. pp. 142–3. ISBN   978-1406720358.
  29. "Constitution (Amendment No. 10) Act 1928". Irish Statute Book . 12 July 1928. Retrieved 19 December 2016.
  30. 1 2 "Ustawa z dnia 24 czerwca 1999 r. o wykonywaniu inicjatywy ustawodawczej przez obywateli" [Law of 24 June 1999 on the execution of a citizens' legislative initiative](PDF). Dziennik Ustaw (in Polish). 2018-11-08. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2020-06-18. Retrieved 2020-11-13.
  31. "'Czarny protest' przed Sejmem" ['Black protest' in front of the Sejm]. Puls Biznesu (in Polish). 2016-10-01. Archived from the original on 2020-11-13. Retrieved 2020-11-13.
  32. "CONSTITUTIA ROMANIEI". 31 July 2018. pp. Article 74.
  33. "CONSTITUTIA ROMANIEI". 31 July 2018. pp. Article 150.
  34. "CONSTITUTIA ROMANIEI". 31 July 2018. pp. Article 151.
  35. Eidgenössische Volksinitiative Archived 2013-08-20 at the Wayback Machine , website of "The Federal Authorities of the Swiss Confederation" (German, possible to switch to French or Italien language). Retrieved 2013-09-04.
  36. "Find out more about e-petitions". UK Parliament. Retrieved 2019-12-16.
  37. Cheung, Helier (2019-03-26). "Brexit debate: Do petitions ever work?" . Retrieved 2019-12-16.

Europe

United States