Equality by lot

Clément Viktorovitch for France Info, April 2023 [Original in French].

Where does the legitimacy of citizen conventions come from?

In France we have already had two citizen conventions: the first in 2020, dealing with the climate, the second very recently, dealing with end-of-life issues. But where does legitimacy of such institutions come from? Why should we trust 150 allotted citizens?

This question is fundamental: citizen conventions are being established, in France and abroad, as a component of representative democracies. Let’s quickly recall the procedure: draw at random several dozens, or even hundreds of individuals, who then meet regularly, for several months, until they formulate their recommendations on the question with which they are dealing. This is what we would like to clarify. Why should we accept that a handful of citizens, selected by chance, would be vested with the power to influence the decisions on subjects that concern all, without us being able to say a word about it, whereas we already have our elected bodies?

As unfamiliar as it may seem, sortition has in fact two essential virtues. The first, it is representative of society: if the participants are allotted in a well fashioned way, and that is far from always being the case, then we will mechanically generate an assembly that resembles France. It would contain as many workers, young people, women, as the general population. The allow introducing into the public discussion the contribution of people whom we rarely hear. That, obviously, is a democratic virtue. But that is not all. The second virtue of sortition is independence. The participants do not owe their place to anything other than chance. They don’t have to worry about being reelected. That guarantees a great independence from political parties and interest groups. And that is crucial. The participants are not bound by any position: they can debate freely and if necessary change their minds.

And why not draw at random our National Assembly?

Because sortition comes with a price to pay. It lacks the essential virtue of elections: consent. If we all accept to obey the laws adopted by parliament, it is because the MPs and senators have garnered, through elections, the consent of the people. That is of course and imperfect consent. It may be criticized in many ways. It is not the consent of everybody but only of a majority – and sometimes of no more than a plurality. However, it still holds that elections confer legitimacy. It is for this reason that Citizen Conventions do not make decisions: they have not received our consent. All that they can do is create citizen-initiated proposals.

We could arrive at the same result with a simple opinion poll.

But that would not be the same result! The principle of a poll is that it records very spontaneous responses… and, often, very uninformed ones. The proposals generated by a citizen convention are of a different type: they are the product of deliberation. The participants do not simply give their opinions. They study the question, interview experts, debate their ideas, develop their positions. The final report gives us an idea of what could have been the public opinion if all citizens had the time put into the question. We are very far from a simple poll. On the contrary, we are part of an ideal: the ideal of “non-violent power of the better argument”, as the philosopher Jurgen Habermas put it.

How to add value to this citizen contribution while respecting the freedom of the elected?

The is indeed the big question! There is a simple solution: the referendum. Let the citizens decide whether to accept or reject the proposal made for them by the convention. The only problem is… that this would require that the elected would accept relinquishing some of their powers. In contrast, there is always the risk that these conventions would find themselves instrumentalized by the established political powers, with government controlling them… and adopting only those proposals that suit them. For the moment, it is rather this situation which is taking place in France – at least as things concern the Great Debate and the Citizens’ Climate Convention.

And so, will citizen conventions remain a tool allowing to citizen-wash government decisions? Or will they become the tool for creating a new democratic legitimacy. Only time will tell.

Filed under: Elections, Press, Sortition |