EXTRA-INSTITUTIONAL ACTORS AND THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE

For the Assembly of the Council of Europe extra-institutional actors may include trade unions, constituted advisory bodies, the business community, interest and pressure groups, advocacies, lobbies and networks of influence. Furthermore, the media play also an important part in the political process. The Assembly strongly supports political pluralism as one of the key principles of a genuine democracy. Therefore it notes that, under some conditions, activities of extra-institutional actors may be beneficial for the functioning of a democratic political system insofar as these actors:

1.  provide a framework for individuals to associate among themselves and jointly express views and defend their interests;
2.  encourage wider participation in public life and provide opportunities to engage in the political process;
3.  offer a link between the people and the political institutions;
4. allow a better representation of specific interests and needs, including those of minorities;
5. provide expert information in the field of their activity needed for informed political decision-making;
6. provide additional channels of public oversight over political decisions.

The Assembly believes that political and state institutions should involve various extra-institutional actors and citizens more actively in the decision-making process. However, in order to improve public confidence in public institutions of government, and thus strengthen democracy and the rule of law, the decision-making process needs to be more transparent.

People have a democratic right to know those actors who have access to government decision-making for the purpose of influence. All kinds of influence which are not exercised in full transparency should be considered as being suspicious and harmful to democracy.

 Advocacy, Lobbies and Networks of Influence

Advocacy is a general term for any activity that a person or organisation undertakes to influence policies. Such activities may be motivated from moral, ethical or faith principles, or aimed at protecting interests, and include media campaigns, public speaking, commissioning and publishing research or polls or the distribution of newsletters.  Lobbying is a form of advocacy where a direct approach is made to legislators or government officials on a specific issue, with the aim to promote (or to prevent) specific changes in legislation in the interests of a given entity. While advocacy groups act publicly and in an organised manner, networks of influence are mostly invisible for the general public. Those are believed to be informal gatherings of more or less influential individuals where they communicate in a personal capacity and establish personal relations which may prove useful for influencing decisions.

Activities of some categories of extra-institutional actors may be beneficial for the functioning of a democratic political system:

• they can provide a framework for individuals to come together and express their views;
• they can encourage wider participation in public life and provide opportunities to engage in the political process;
• they may offer a more efficient link between the people and the political institutions;
• they can allow a better representation of specific interests;
• they may better defend minorities and make their specific needs better known and heard by the society, and taken into account at institutional decision-making level;
• they may be a source of expert information for the political institutions based on their specialist knowledge in the field of their activity;
• they may provide additional channels of public oversight over political decisions and serve as extra-institutional “checks and balances”.

 However, activities of extra-institutional actors and groups may raise a number of issues related to the fundamental principles of democracy.

 Legitimacy and Representativity. The institutional actors are deemed to be representative of the whole society (guaranteed through general elections) and hold their legitimacy from the acceptance that they exercise power in the general interest. On the contrary, in addition to the fact that they do not stem from general elections, extra-institutional actors are, by definition, representative of a part of the society and therefore do not enjoy full legitimacy. At the same time, extra-institutional actors often have a tendency to position themselves as self-proclaimed representatives and defenders of the general interest. In addition, the views presented to the political decision makers and to the general public by the leaders of an interest group might be unrepresentative of that group, in which case even the internal legitimacy of such leaders and groups would be in doubt. Inversely, groups which enjoy considerable support of the public and positive coverage in the media, and have the capacity to mobilise their followers, are often regarded as partners by state institutions, thus obtaining additional legitimacy and authority which may go beyond their effective representativity.

Transparency and Accountability. There may be a variety of situations in this field but, as a rule, extra-institutional actors have a lesser degree of external transparency (awareness by the general public of the internal functioning of such actors and of methods which they use to attain their goals), and both external and internal accountability, as compared to institutional actors. Moreover, the lack of transparency may cause suspicions of political corruption.

 Interference in decision making and distortion of the balance of power. By definition, when getting involved in the political process, extra-institutional actors seek to influence the political decisions of institutions in accordance with their sectoral interests. While doing so, they aim to modify the distribution of power, to change the order of priorities on the public political agenda and to alter the balance of interests as it results from general elections, in favour of particular interests which they represent. As a consequence, the principle of political equality of people is endangered, since those interest groups which are better organised structurally and enjoy substantial financial backing and positive media attention have better chances to have their political preferences taken into account than others.

Conclusion

Democracy is a system of government by the people and in the interest of the people. Raising individuals’ awareness of their responsibility for their destiny and involving them in the management of public affairs makes democracy stronger. It is therefore fully legitimate and welcome for the citizens of a democratic society to seek to influence, in line with their interests and/or convictions, decisions which are taken at the level of state institutions. However, such influence must be exercised in accordance with the law, in full transparency and with due respect to the interests of other persons and of the common interests of society.

Political and state institutions should involve various extra-institutional actors and citizens more actively in the decision-making process. At the same time, in order to improve public confidence in public institutions of government, and thus strengthen democracy and the rule of law, the decision-making process needs to be more transparent.

People have a democratic right to know the actors who have access to government decision-making for the purpose of influence. All kinds of influence which are not exercised in full transparency should be considered as being suspicious and harmful to democracy. Accordingly, democratic institutions should reject any attempts to influence political decisions which are made in a non-transparent way.

The influence of extra-institutional actors on political decision making needs further examination, with particular attention to:

1. the scale of the involvement of extra-institutional actors in the political process in the Council of Europe member states, as well as at the international level;
2. the impact of these actors on the functioning of democratic institutions and on the legitimacy of the democratic political process;
3. the existing legal framework for such activities in the Council of Europe member states and to the appropriateness of taking additional standard-setting measures at national and European levels.