Democracy 4.0
Democracy 4.0
Explanation of Democracy 4.0
The members of the Parliament represent popular sovereignty, but sovereignty belongs to the people. (Art. 1.2 Spanish Constitution)
We, as citizens, want to participate directly in those decision-making processes that affect us, since we now know that this is technically possible, via Internet.
In June 2010, Juan Moreno Yague, attorney from Sevilla, drafted an administrative statement requesting the Congress to allow him to participate in the voting process online, from home.
This statement proposes that, considering that the voting-age population in Spain is 35 million represented by 350 deputies, it is possible to take a small portion of representation out of each of them. A thirty-five-millionth (our own portion of sovereignty) each time we choose to access via internet to Congress.
Since all members together represent popular sovereignty, a fraction of it would be subtracted, the corresponding share of sovereignty given the amount of people who use their right to vote. Therefore, our participation would be proportionate and fair. Technically, this just means adding about nine decimal numbers to the voting chart.
What does this mean? That anytime a hundred thousand citizens vote online, a congress seat comes back to the people. If a million citizens do, ten seats come back.
Simple. Instant real democracy. Whenever I'm interested, I use my right to vote, and if I am not, I let the members do their job. This gives us at least the possibility of a veto and the ability of constant supervision. Given that, people's control over the decisions made by the Parliament grows. Budgets, welfare cuts, the most controversial political measures and those with a greater significance, could be decided by those who are most affected by them, the citizens, forcing deputies to take their job more seriously, as long as they would know that we all are watching as taxpaying observers. In short, this new kind of democracy, real time democracy, would erase the current blank cheque that our representatives in this election-based democracy actually own.
This statement is, since November 2010, in the Commission for Constitutional Guarantees of the Congress, and we are still waiting for an answer, an answer that they should have given in three months, according to our laws, as long as administrative silence is not applicable in this matter.
We presume that the adoption of such a measure, which would return sovereignty to its rightful owners, would not please our representatives. We are talking about the legitimacy of the legislative organ and about the true role that our representatives should have: they are paid for attending our interests.
It does not imply erasing the Congress or the representation, neither the political parties nor elections. What is proposed is a combination of both ways of political participation, since we believe that the legal and technical conditions exist, so it's time to make use of our share of sovereignty, to decide, anytime we want, our future.