�ݺ�ߣ

MORE REPRESENTATION = DEMOCRACY?
International Political Studies Colloquium
REPRESENTATIVIDADE, MANDATO
PARLAMENTAR E DEMOCRACIA
DIRETA
UM DEBATE ITALIANO
Giovanni Damele
IFILNOVA

566 shifts
 313 – Camera dei Deputati
 253 – Senato della Repubblica
347 MPs (36,53%) (www.openpolis.it)
Giovanni Damele - giovanni.damele@fcsh.unl.pt

Restrictive mandate theorist might maintain that
true representation occurs only when the
representative acts on explicit instructions from his
constituents, that any exercise of discretion is a
deviation from this ideal [Pitkin 1967: 146]

The juridical mandate makes the representative
directly responsible and legally accountable to her
client. But the political representative is neither
responsible for or legally accountable to those who
voted for her, nor obligated by personal
relationships [Urbinati 2006: 132]
Political mandate assures the sympathetic link
between the elected and the electing citizens
[Urbinati 2006: 132]

What is the relationship between the action of
representatives and will of the represented? In very
general terms, the two primary responses to this question
point in opposite directions: one affirms that power can
and must be grounded solidly in its popular constituents,
that, through representation, the people’s will is expressed
in power; and the other claims that sovereign authority,
even popular sovereignty, must through the mechanisms
of representation be separated and shielded from the will
of the constituents. The trick is that all forms of modern
representation combine, in different measures, these two
seemingly contradictory mandates. Representation
connects and cuts.
[Hardt & Negri 2017: 5]

Art. 1 – Italy is a democratic Republic founded on
labour. Sovereignty belongs to the people and is
exercised by the people in the forms and within the
limits of the Constitution.

Art. 67 – Each Member of Parliament represents
the Nation and carries out his duties without a
binding mandate.

Art. 67 – Each Member of Parliament
represents the Nation and carries out his
duties without a binding mandate.
Art. 1 – Italy is a democratic Republic founded on
labour. Sovereignty belongs to the people and is
exercised by the people in the forms and within the
limits of the Constitution.
Art. 49 – Any citizen has the right to freely establish
parties to contribute to determining national
policies through democratic processes.

Art. 72 – A Bill introduced in either House of Parliament
shall, under the Rules of procedure of such House, be
scrutinised by a Committee and then by the whole House,
which shall consider it section by section and then put it to
the final vote. The Rules shall establish shorter procedures to
consider a Bill that has been declared urgent. They may also
establish when and how the consideration and approval of
bills may be referred to Committees, including Standing
Committees, composed so as to reflect the proportion
of the Parliamentary Groups. […]
Art. 82 – Each House of Parliament may conduct enquiries
on matters of public interest. For this purpose, it shall detail
from among its members a Committee formed in such a
way so as to represent the proportionality of
existing Parliamentary Groups. […]

Artigo 155.º
Exercício da função de Deputado
1. Os Deputados exercem livremente o seu mandato,
sendo-lhes garantidas condições adequadas ao eficaz
exercício das suas funções, designadamente ao
indispensável contato com os cidadãos eleitores e à sua
informação regular.
2. A lei regula as condições em que a falta dos Deputados,
por causa de reuniões ou missões da Assembleia, a atos
ou diligências oficiais a ela estranhos constitui motivo
justificado de adiamento destes.
3. As entidades públicas têm, nos termos da lei, o dever de
cooperar com os Deputados no exercício das suas
funções.

Artigo 160.º - (Perda e renúncia do mandato)
1. Perdem o mandato os Deputados que:
[…]
c) Se inscrevam em partido diverso daquele pelo
qual foram apresentados a sufrágio;
d) Sejam judicialmente condenados por crime de
responsabilidade no exercício da sua função em tal pena
ou por participação em organizações racistas ou que
perfilhem a ideologia fascista.
2. Os Deputados podem renunciar ao mandato,
mediante declaração escrita.

The Electoral Court.
(Act of Parliament of 29. Feb. 1920 No. 125)
The Electoral Court is the exclusively competent
authority:
[…]
4. to decide whether a member of the National Assembly
or County Council has forfeited his seat for
a) having lost the right to be elected;
b) having lost his membership of the party whose
candidate he was, and that for some disreputable and
dishonourable cause..

It is a well-known fact that, because he is unable to
achieve any appreciable influence on government,
the isolated individual lacks any real political
existence. Democracy is only feasible if, in order to
influence the will of society, individuals integrate
themselves into associations based on their various
political goals. Collective bodies, which unite the
common interests of their individual members as
political parties, must come to mediate between the
individual and the state. [Kelsen 2013: 39]

Discredit political parties […] [constitutes] an
ideologically veiled resistance to the realization of
democracy itself [Kelsen 2013: 39]
For social-technical reasons, it is impossible to leave
the creation of the state order at all of its levels to
direct popular control [Kelsen 2013: 49]

To be sure, the imperative mandate cannot return in its
old form
A legal guarantee for the constant, close contact
between representatives and constituents could help
reconcile the broad masses with the parliamentary
principle. The lack of accountability of the
representative towards his constituents is without a
doubt one of the central causes of the ill-feeling that
exists towards the institution of parliament today. Yet,
contrary to the claims of nineteenth-century legal
doctrine, this lack of accountability is by no means an
essential element of the parliamentary system
[Kelsen 2013: 58]

 With regard to the lack of accountability of representatives
towards their voters, however, it is already a breakthrough when
some newer constitutions stipulate that a representative, though he
is not bound to the instructions of his constituents, nonetheless
loses his mandate once he leaves or is expelled from the party for
or by which he was elected. Such a stipulation arises naturally
where voting occurs by party lists. For if the voter—as in this case
—no longer exercises any influence over the selection of the
candidates, and his vote is based solely on his allegiance to a
particular party, then the candidate running for office—from the
voter’s standpoint—receives his mandate only on the basis of his
membership in that party. Here, it is only logical that the
representative must lose his mandate, if he no longer belongs to the
party that sent him to parliament
 It is advisable that the loss of a mandate result only from an
explicit resignation or expulsion from the party
[Kelsen 2013: 60]

Bibliography
The Constitution of the Czechoslovak Republic. Prague:
Édition de la Société L’Effort de la Tchecoslovaquie, 1920
Michael Hardt, Antonio Negri (2017). Assembly. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Hans Kelsen (2013). The Essence and Value of Democracy
(ed. by Nadia Urbinati and Carlo Invernizzi Accetti). Plymouth:
Rowman & Littlefield.
Hanna F. Pitkin (1967). The Concept of Representation.
Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press.
Carl Schmitt (2008). Constitutional Theory. Durham and
London: Duke University Press.
Nadia Urbinati (2006). Representative Democracy. Chicago
and London: The University of Chicago Press.

�ݺ�ߣ

Flul 2 5_19

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Flul 2 5_19 (20)

More from Giovanni Damele (11)

Recently uploaded (19)

Flul 2 5_19