Direct Democracy-Reform in the center of the making of the new constitution of Zurich by Andreas Gross (Switzerland) Director of the Scientific Institute for Direct Democracy in St-Ursanne and Swiss MP & Leader of the Social-Democrats in the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE), Constitutional Councillor IRIE-Briefing Tour / Rapperswil June 11 th

The old Constitution of Zurich from April 1869 was the achievement of a revolutionary people’s movement and the most direct democratic constitution of the world : 4 Referendums lead to the most complete DD-Set in a Constitution (Constitutional and legal initiative and oblig. referendum; financial oblig. referendum; individual citizen initiative) Social reform program Transformation from a liberal to a democratic regime 30 years later: A source of inspiration for CAL

Since 1980 most of the 26 Swiss cantons elaborated a new Consti- tution. One third of them did it by a directly elected Constitutional Council. The Parliament of ZH decided to elaborate a new Constitution. Base: A Motion of a MP. June 13th 1999: The Majority of the citizens voted yes: 211’ ’130 No to an elaboration by a directly elected Const.Council. June 18th 2000: Election of 100 Const.Councillors in a proportional.election in 3 Constituencies Sept.13th 2000: First meeting of the Const.C

The political composition of the Constitutional Council in Zurich National Conservatives (People’s P.): 31 s. Socialdemocrats (center left): 27 s. Liberals (center right): 22 s. Christian Democrats 7 s. Greens 6 s. Evangelists (center) 5 s. Evangelistic Union (cons. right) 2 s.

The 8 phases of the Making of the new cantonal constitution in Zurich (Sept.2000-Feb.2005) Sept.2000: First plenary meeting Feb 2001-March 03: 7 committees elaborate 1. draft Spring 2003: First draft decided in the plenary Summer 2003: 5 months :Public consultation Nov 03-spring 04: Revision by the committees Spring/summer 04: 2nd draft decided in the plenary Autumn: Majority for the final draft Feb 2005: Maj. of the people approve: 64,2% yes (37% participation) : Valide since Jan.2006

The main problem of DD in ZH : Voting by mail increased indirectly the difficulty to qualify an initiative four times In former times that Ballot stations were the most effective place to gather signatures. In a ordinary place in town you need to argue 4 times longer for a signature. We need to reduce the number of signatures in order to keep the balance DD should stay a instrument of the underrepresented

A collective learning process had to me stimulated in the Committee and the Council: Fine tune, not reduce DD ! Signature reduction from 10’000 to 6000 (Initiative) and 6000 to 3000 signatures (Ref) in 6 months /2 months “Constructive Referenda”/Citizen motion/ Supporting political citizens engagements Foreigner democratic rights Communal and tax-referenda

A collective learning process had to me stimulated in the Committee and the Council: Fine tune, not reduce DD ! Signature reduction from 10’000 to 6000 (Initiative) and 6000 to 3000 signatures (Ref) in 6 months /2 months “Constructive Referenda”/Citizen motion/ Supporting political citizens engagements Foreigner democratic rights Communal and tax-referenda

The Result after 3 years debates: More inclusive, finer, more interactive ! Signature reduction to less than 1%/0.5% of elect. “Constructive Referenda” Supporting political citizens engagements Shortening the time frames to 18/30/36 months Communal (12), eco and tax (obligat)-referenda Increase of obligat.financ.ref.limits (600’000/6 Mio) Parliament may present options to the voters

The effect of the new DD- requirements: Small increase of initiatives ! : average 4,3 in. per year : average 4,3 in. per year : 5,75 in. per year : 5,75 in. per year (2007:Small initiative against tax- privileges for foreigners, which would not have qualified under the old regime, was adopted by the people !)