Working
Pap
ECS
No. 90/1
Uonce
BEKEMANS
European Integration a
Policies. Analysis
of
a l
Polarity
ECS
No. 90/2
Christine FAURE
Intellectuelles et citoyeJ
en France, de la n!volu
au second empire
(17S5
ECS
No. 91/3
Dominique POULOT
De l'beritage monumen
I'
entreprise de patrimoi
une histoire de la
transiJ
culturelle
en
France,
)C
ECS
No. 91/4
Mary DAL Y !Kirsten
S~
Time and Money:
Stratc
for Redistributing Reso
to Women
ECS
No. 91/5
Claudius GELLERT
The Emergence
of
Thrc
University Models. Insl
and Functional Modific
European Higher
Educ1
ECS
No. 92/6
Xose-M.
NU:rimz
Historical Research on
Regionalism and Peripl
Nationalism in Spain: a
Reappraisal
EUI
WORKING
PAPERS
IN EUROPEAN
CULTURAL
STUDIES
EUI
Working
Paper
ECS
No.
93/2
A Peoples' Europe?
European Citizenship and European Identity
JENNIFER M.
WELSH
European University Institute, Florence
1990
the
EID
Working
Paper
Series
is
DIHiene~s.
each
sub-series
is
numbered
Working
Paper
LAW
No
90/1).
EUROPEAN UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE,
FLORENCE
EUROPEAN CULTURE RESEARCH CENTRE
EUI Working Paper ECS No. 93/2
A Peoples'
Europe?
European
Citizenship
and
European
Identity
JENNJFER M.
WELSH
BADIA FIESOLANA, SAN DOMENICO
(FI)
All rights reserved.
No part
of
this paper may be reproduced in any form
without permission
of
the author.
© Jennifer M. Welsh
Printed in Italy in September 1993
European University Institute
Badia Fiesolana
I-
50016 San Domenico (FI)
Italy
A
PEOPLES'
EUROPE?
EUROPEAN
CITIZENSHIP
AND
EUROPEAN
IDENTITY
Dr.
Jennifer
M.
Welsh
Jean
Monnet
Fellow,
European
University
Institute
"We
are not forming coalitions between States,
but
union
among
people."
Jean
Monnet
Washington,
1952
As
part
of
its
mission to move beyond a purely
"businessmen's
Europe",
the
drafters
of
the
recent
Maastricht
Treaty
on
European
Union
have
for
the
first
time
attempted
to define
what
it
means
to be
a
European
citizen.1 \';rhis idea of citizenship is a
relatively
new one
in
Community
parlance,
given "that
the
agenda
for
integration
has
hitherto
concerned
itself
mainly
with
the
achievement
of
economic
rather
than
political or
cultural
objectives. Moreover,
the
fact
that
the
original
Treaty
of Rome refers to
several
"peoples" -
and
not
a single
one -
suggests
that
it
did
not
intend
to
create
any
supranational
notion
of
European
citizenship.
Instead,
the
individual
rights
of
citizenship
were
to
remain
within
the
competence
of
indivi.dual
Member
States.2
As a consequence,
the
evolution
of
European
citizenship
has
been
shaped
by
the
more
general
tension
within
the
Community
between
supra
nationalism
and
intergovernmentalism,
combining
concrete
rights
which
can
be
extrapolated
from
existing
treaties
with
more
general
ideas of a common
"European
identity".3
lThe
process
of
constructing "'Peoples' Europe" actually began
in
1985 with
the
publication
of
the
Adonnino Report, commissioned by
the
Fontainebleau
European
Council.
2Mancini,
"The
Making
of a
Constitution
for Europe", Common Market Law
Review,
26
(1989),
595-614
(p.
596). Hence, citizens of a Member
State
were still
regarded
by
the
Treaty
as
aliens
or
foreigners by
other
Member
States,
and could suffer discrimination in those
areas
not
covered
by EC law.
l
-2-
The
result
is
a
weak
and
ambiguous
legal
status
which
does
little
to
reflect
or
develop
a
sense
of
shared
goals
and
values
among
.
European
peoples.
The
Rights
of
Citizenship
Before
tracing
the
development
of
European
citizenship,
it
is
useful
to
consider
the
more
established
concept
of
state
citizenship
that
has
been
discussed
by
political
theorists,
economists
and
sociologists.
Citizenship
has
become
an
increasingly
important
subject
for social
scientists
in
the
latter
half
of
the
twentieth
century,
for
reasons
existing
both
within
and
beyond
the
nation-state.
External
factors
include
the
intensifying
processes
of
globalization
and
modernization4,
the
increase
in
economic
and
cultural
transnational
connections
among
peoples,
and
the
creation
of
international
guarantees
for
the
protection
individual
human
rights.5
Internally,
citizenship
has
factored
into
debates
concerning
the
growing
crisis
in
the
welfare
state,
the
erosion
of
participatory
democracy,
the
link
between
state
and
"civil
society",
and
the
jurisdictional
power
struggles
between
regional
and
central
governments.
6
In
his
now
famous
1949
article,
"Citizenship
and
Social
Class",
sociologist
T.H.
Marshall
defines
citizenship
as
a
"status
bestowed
on
those
who
are
full
members
of
a
community."?
Hence,
though
it
is
a
status
accorded
to
individuals,
citizenship
is
a
fundamentally
social
phenomenon,
which
has
little
meaning
outside
of
a
collective
framework.
More
importantly,
citizenship
is
an
egalitarian
symbol:
all
those
who
possess
it
enjoy de
jure,
if
not
de facto,
equality
with
respect
to
its
corresponding
rights
and
duties.B
in
this
sense,
notes
3carlos
Closa,
"The
Concept
of
Citizenship
in
the
Treaty
on
European
Union"
Common Market
Law Review,
29
(1992),
1137-1169
(p.
1139J.
This
paper
will
rely
heavily
on
Closa
for
its
legal
analysis.
4For
a
discussion
of
the
link
between
globalization
and
citizenship,
see
Global Politics:
Globalization and the Nation-State,
edited
by
Anthony
G.
McGrew,
Paul
G.
Lewis
et
al
(Oxford:
Polity
Press,
1992
),
Part
IV.
5The
development
of
these
guarantees
is
discussed
by
RJ.
Vincent,
Human
Rights
and
International Relations
(Cambridge:
Cambridge
University
Press,
1986).
6A.n
overview
of
these
current
debates,
with
a
particular
emphasis
on
Britain
can
be
found
in
Citizenship,
edited
by
Geoff
Andrews
(London:
Lawrence
and
Wishart,
199ll.
7T.H.
Marshall,
"Citizenship
and
Social
Class",
in
Class, Citizenship
and
Social Development:
.:ssays
by T.H. Marshal!
(London:
University
of
Chicago
Press,
1964J,
71-134
(p.
92J.
Ibid.
-3-
political
theorist
David
Held,
citizenship
is a
particularly
interesting
concept,
for
it
"combines
in
rather
unusual
ways
the
public
and
social
with
the
individual
aspects
of
political life
....
Individual
citizens
enjoy
entitlements
on
the
basis
of
a
fundamental
equality
of
condition,
which
is
their
membership
ofthe
community."9
In
concrete
terms,
the
rights
of
citizenship
were
originally
translated
as
entitlement
to
equality
under
the
law
-
what
Marshall
refers
to
as
civil
rights.
This
essentially
"negative"
conception
of
rights,10
particularly
dominant
in
Enlightenment
thinking,
granted
citizens
a
free
space
in
which
to
pursue
their
individual
goals
without
the
risk
of
state
interference.
It
therefore
included
the
right
to
freedom
of
speech,
the
right
to
private
property,
and
the
access
to
legal
process.11
Over
time,
however,
it
became
clear
that
such
rights
were
not
necessarily
exercised
by
all
and
that
a
negative
interpretation
of
rights
did
not
give
citizens
a
sufficient
degree
of
empowerment.
While
in
theory
there
was
equality
before
the
law,
in
practice
there
were
non
legal
barriers
restricting
the
capacity
to
choose
between
different
courses
of
action
or
to
guarantee
the
possession
of
certain
entitlements.
As
Marshall
puts
it:
"A
property
right
is
not
a
right
to
possess
property,
but
a
right
to
acquire
it,
if
you
can,
and
to
protect
it,
if
you
can
get
it."12
Consequently,
over
the
course
of
the
nineteenth
century,
citizenship
expanded
to
include
the
right
to
participate
in
the
decision-making
process.
These
political
rights
for
the
most
part
consisted
of
the
right
to
vote
and
to
stand
for
public
office.
In
our
own
tw_entieth
century,
further
"positive"
rights
have
been
added
to
the
status
of
citizenship.
Through
the
institutions
of
the
modern
welfare
state,
social
rights
(e.g., access
to
health
care,
education,
and
social
services)
have
become
part
of
the
catalogue
of
citizenship
entitlements
in
many
nation-states
of
Europe.
i~avid
~e~d,
"~etween
State
and
Civil
Society:
Citizenship",
in
Andrews,
op.cit.,
19-25
(p.
21).
,
The
d1stmctwn
between
negative
and
positive
liberty
is
made
by
Isaiah
Berlin.
1
~
For
a
history
of
the
development
of
citizenship
rights
in
France,
see
Catherine
Withol
de
Wenden,
Citoyennete, Nationalite et Immigration
(Arcantere:
Paris,
1987).
12Marshall,
op.cit.,
p.
97.
The
same
could
be
said
for
the
rule
oflaw:
while
in
theory
everyone
has
access
to
due
process,
in
reality
litigation
is
too
costly
for
many
individuals
to
pursue.
l
-4-
The
Rise
of
European
Citizenship
Until
very
recently,
the
European
Community
did
not
assert
such
a
substantive
list
of
entitlements
for
individuals
living
within
its
boundaries.
Indeed,
the
founding
fathers
of
the
European
post-war
order
consciously
avoided
creating
a
relationship
between
the
individual
and
the
Community
akin
to
that
existing
on
a
domestic
level
between
the
individual
and
the
nation-state.
If
any
concept
of
"Peoples'
rights"
motivated
these
engineers
of
European
integration,
it
was
a
relatively
embryonic
one,
based
on
civil
notions
such
as
the
pre-eminence
of
law,
respect
for
human
rights
and
the
equality
of
all
Europeans.
The
first
post-war
European
organisation,
the
Council
of
Europe
(1949),
was
to be
the
incarnation
of
these
general
humanist
principles.13
Building
on
this
legacy,
the
individual
rights
of
European
peoples
implicit
in
the
Treaty
of
Rome
and
the
subsequent
Single
European
Act
were
limited
in
scop.e,
negative
in
character,
and
exercised
by
only
a few.
These
civil
and
economic
rights
-
such
as
free
movement,
non-discrimination,
or
the
right
to
appeal
to
the
European
Court
-
were
intended
primarily
to
facilitate
the
completion
of
the
common
market.
Similarly,
while
rudimentary
political
rights
were
introduced
with
the
election
of
Members
to
the
European
Parliament
(1979),
they
did
not
prove
strong
enough
to
generate
a
coherent
notion
of
Community
citizenship.
First,
as
legal
scholar
Carlos
Closa
argues,
given
the
lack
of
legislative
competence
of
the
EP,
the
individual's
condition
as
elector
did
not
"reproduce
the
constitutional
link
between
citize:O:s
and
the
exercise
of
sovereignty
characteristic
of
the
concept of citizen.
"14
And
second,
the
condition
of
elector
did
not
stem
from
subjection
to
EC
law
or
a
concept
of
single
citizenship,
but
from
the
condition of
national
of
a
Member
State.
In
other
words,
the
rights
provided
by
these
changes
to
the
EC
legislative
process
still
failed
to
untie
the
tight
knot
between
nationality
and
political
citizenship.
Voting
rights
were
limited
to
nationals
or
citizens
of
each
State,
and
only
exceptionally
granted
to
13See
Peter
Leuprecht, "La Forteresse
et
les Droits de I'Homme", L'euenement Europeen, 11
(1990),
51-60
(p.
51).
14
.
Closa, op.cit., p. 1144.
-5-
citizens
of
other
Member
States.15
As
we
shall
see
below,
this
reluctance
to
base
voting
rights
on
residence
rather
than
nationality
reflects
a
more
general
preference
to
reserve
the
political
domain
(the
realm
in
which
one
can
influence
state
policy)
for
one's
own
nationals.16
Nevertheless,
as
the
functions
and
jurisdiction
of
the
European
Community
have
expanded,
giving
it
an
increasingly
"state-like"
character,
many
constitutional
lawyers
have
argued
for
an
enrichment
of
the
status
accorded
to
individual
Europeans.17
In
addition
to
this
legal
reasoning,
a
rough
idea
of
European
citizenship
has
gradually
coalesced
around
two
practical
realities:
1)
the
rights
that
the
progressive
completion
of
the
internal
market
had
granted
to
individuals,
regardless
of
nationality
(e.g.,
free
movement);
and
2)
the
increasing
need
to
differentiate
those
individuals
from
citizens
of
non-member
states.
As a
result,
terms
such
as
"Community
citizen",
"European
citizen"
or
"Community
national"
have
been
coined
to
describe
those
persons
subject
to
the
ever-expanding
jurisdiction
of
EC
law.
Today,
this
latter
term
-
"Community
national"
-
has
become
a
formal
Community
concept,
denoting
a
status
to
which
the
rights
and
benefits
of
European
citizenship
may
be attached.18
With
the
Treaty
on
European
Un.ion,
negotiated
in
December
1991,
the
Community
has
endeavoured
to
formalise
these
rights
of
the
European
citizen.
Citizenship
of
the
Union
is
included
in
Part
Two
of
the
"Provisions
Amending
the
Treaty
Establishing
the
European
Economic
Community",
which
contains
a
catalogue
of
rights
attached
to
the
condition
of
citizen
(Sa
to
8d)
and
a
procedure
for
further
development
of
citizenship
should
current
rights
need
to
be
strengthened
or
new
ones
added
(Se).
Article
Sa
grants
to
every
citizen
of
the
Union
the
right
to
move
and
reside
freely
within
the
territory
of
any
Member
State.
On
this
point,
the
Treaty
implies
a
broadening
of
the
previous
Community
principles
by
removing
the
explicit
link
between
free
movement
and
the
exercise
of
economic
15only
Belgium,
Ireland
and
the
Netherlands gave "active rights" i.e. the
right
to
vote-
to
residents
who
are
citizens of
another
Member
State.
16cJosa, op.cit., p. 1145. .
17AC.
Evans,
"Nationality law
and
European integration", European Law Review, 16,
p.
197,
in
Closa, op.cit.,
p.
1145.
18cJosa,
op.cit., p. 1149.