21-06-2024
Election-Watch.EU has published its preliminary assessment of the 2024 European Elections. Their analysis outlines the strengths and weaknesses of electoral processes across the EU, highlighting best practices in what remains a highly unharmonised process.
As argued by The Good Lobby Founder and Professor Alberto Alemanno, the widely differing national frameworks governing European elections challenges makes it hard to truly speak of one single EU Election. In practice, between 6-9 June 2024, 27 different national elections took place simultaneously. “We’ve seen people vote for national parties running national candidates, presenting national agendas.”
Election-Watch.EU preliminary analysis of the 2024 European elections offers some valuable insights on the state of national electoral processes and possible ways forward to improve the quality of EU elections.
Equality of participation and representation
Voting laws and requirements vary widely across the EU. In some countries, suffrage rights are accorded as of the age of 16 (like Belgium, Germany, Malta, and Austria). Age-restrictions for running in the EU elections also lack harmonisation. MEP candidates must be 25 in Italy or Greece, whereas candidates can run in Belgium as of 18.
Voting systems are also quite different, the proportional voting system being unequally implemented across the EU, as are systems for alternative voting. In Czechia, Ireland, Malta, Slovakia, voting from abroad is impossible.
Inclusion of underrepresented groups
The preliminary assessment reveals that the participation of women, the youth, and persons with disabilities remains low – the last of which is particularly alarming as 13 Member States do not grant voting rights to persons under guardianship. Frameworks for cross border voting remain dysfunctional. Language barriers and early administrative deadlines prevented many from voting in time.
Transparency of campaign finance and accountability
EU rules on the funding of European Political Parties are rather straightforward and allow for a significant amount of transparency. However, during EU elections, most transactions are carried out by national parties, thereby falling under the scope of national laws. Member State rules on campaign financing vary significantly, and could generally improve. The report suggests robust legal regimes can only be found in 11 EU Member States.
Campaign spending limits differ across the EU, as 10 Member States have no spending limits. Laws governing transparency and disclosures are also fragmented.
The need for harmonisation to establish a truly European election
Election-Watch.EU’s preliminary assessment is enlightening, and demonstrates how lack of harmonisation is fragmenting EU electoral processes at all levels. Whether it is the voting age, voting systems, deadlines, or campaign financing laws. Voting in an EU election in Malta has little to do with casting a ballot in Germany.
All of these issues exacerbate the fundamental problem with EU elections, who have hitherto been unable to establish the necessary link between EU decision making and the wider public. As Professor Alberto Alemanno says: “This necessarily creates a democratic deficit, as well as an intelligibility deficit, […] and means we are not able to understand exactly who takes decisions at what level, and how we can contribute to it.”