Popular initiative — Wikipedia

A popular initiative is a process of participatory democracy or direct democracy which allows a certain number of citizens, by a number of signatures fixed in advance, to seize a legislative assembly (within the framework of participatory democracy) or the people directly by referendum (within the framework of direct democracy) so that it decides on a bill. It should not be confused with the petition, which has no compulsory character and constitutes a simple request made to the State.

The popular initiative referendum exists at national level in 36 countries according to the Magni-Berton Raul academics and Clara Egger, in around forty countries according to the site Direct-Democracy-Navigator.org , from the University of Wuppertal, in cooperation with Democracy International and the Institute of Initiatives and Referendums in Europe; In at least 18 of them, the device has never given rise to a referendum.

In some countries, the agreement of the authorities is essential, as in Pologs ^{[ first ] , [ 2 ]} . In other countries, the request for referendum is made without requiring the agreement of the authorities, which can at most make unnecessary the holding of the ballot by directly voting the proposal by parliamentary means. These include Albania, Armenia, Bolivia, Bulgaria, Colombia, Costa Rica ^{[ 3 ]} , Croatia ^{[ 4 ]} , Ecuador, Georgia, Hungary, Italy ^{[ 5 ]} , Kenya, Latvia ^{[ 6 ]} , Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Macedonia, Malta, the Marshall Islands, Mexico, Micronesia, New Zealand ^{[ 7 ]} , the Palaos, Peru, the Philippines, Saint-Marin, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia ^{[ 8 ]} , Switzerland, Taiwan, Uruguay as well as Venezuela ^{[ 9 ]} , just as most American and German states (Bavaria ^{[ ten ] , [ 11 ] , [ twelfth ]} , Berlin ^{[ 13 ] , [ 14 ]} ).

Principle [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

Not all referendums are “popular initiative”. The popular initiative referendum is characterized by the fact that a number of voters signatures must be collected. The number is fixed in advance.

Other referendums are generally on the initiative of institutions. For example in the United States, states legislatures generally have the power to submit a project to the referendum ^{[ 15 ]} . In France, the President of the Republic may, on the proposal of the government and in application of article 11 of the Constitution, submit to a referendum a bill. The institutions have the advantage that they do not have to collect a signature to carry out a referendum.

A referendum can also be compulsory. In Switzerland, any modification of the Constitution, membership of collective security organizations (e.g. NATO) or supranational communities (e.g. EU) goes through a compulsory referendum.

The three types of referendums can coexist.

In countries where the popular initiative referendum is frequent, referendums are generally grouped in the same ballot, or even the same day as the elections. For example in Switzerland, referendums are organized four Sundays per year during which the citizen may have to vote both on federal, cantonal or communal referendums and local or federal elections.

Standard concerned [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

First, the text submitted to the popular initiative referendum can be a bill. In this case he must comply with the Constitution so as not to hit the principle of the hierarchy of standards ^{[ 16 ]} .

Second, the text may aim to modify the Constitution. When possible, the number of signatures required is, most often, higher than to propose a law ^{[ 17 ]} .

Third, the initiative can take a “combined” form and predict in its text the modification of both the Constitution and laws in concordance ^{[ 18 ]} . In this case, it is the number of signatures required for the constitutional modification which applies.

Specificity of the abrogative referendum [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

When the initiative simply has the object of repeal A law without creating a text, it has a special status. In French, this process is described as abrogative referendum.

In the United States, she then took name of veto referendum or even referendum short, while an initiative which provides for a real creation of text will be called initiative . In some states the number of signatures required for a veto referendum is lower than for an initiative ^{[ 19 ]} .

For example in Italy, it is the only mode of existing popular initiative, the people who cannot offer a written text ^{[ 20 ]} .

In Switzerland, citizens have the power to propose a text modifying the constitution by the federal popular initiative. His acceptance requires the double majority of the votes of the people and the cantons. In legislative matters, only the abrogative referendum is possible at the federal level (it is called Optional referendum ), but at the cantonal and municipal level, the referendum is also possible for a proposal or a modification of the law.

Variation in the number of signatures according to the standard concerned [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

The methods of implementation vary significantly from one country to another. Thus, in Taiwan, the signatures of 0.01 then 1.5% of the population registered on the electoral lists, collected in the space of six months, make it possible to cause the referendum of a bill. The result, if it is positive, must reach the quorum of 25% of the registered to be legally binding. In contrast, in New Zealand, the signatures of 10% of the registrants are necessary in the space of one year, and the result is legally binding.

In Switzerland, 100,000 signatures collected within an imperative period of 18 months are necessary for a federal popular initiative and 50,000 within 100 days for an optional referendum (for around 8.4 million inhabitants including 5 million beneficiaries right).

In Italy, 500,000 signatures are necessary for an abrogative referendum (for around 60 million inhabitants, including 45 million beneficiaries).

In the United States, as an example in Arkansas, the number of signatures to offer a veto referendum corresponds to 6% of voters who voted in the last election of the governor, when it takes 8% for a legislative initiative and 10% for a constitutional initiative. On the other hand, in other American states it is possible that the number of signatures required is the same for two of these types of initiatives, or even for the three. Most states are based on the previous government election to fix the percentage, knowing that in the United States the rate of elections is relatively low. It all depends in fact on the simultaneity of the governor’s election with the presidential election, because it is the latter which arouses the most enthusiasm (in general, more than 60% of participation for a presidential election, against less than 50 % for other polls) ^{[ 21 ]} .

Limits [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

Insofar as the popular initiative referendum directly gives the speech to the people, the idea of ​​imposing limits is very controversial. However, all the countries where this referendum exists provided limits, but in very varied forms.

Nature of the limits [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

When it comes to a popular legislative initiative, it must obviously respect the Constitution. If it is unconstitutional, the referendum cannot take place, or else it can be canceled. It is therefore to all the rights and freedoms mentioned in the Constitution, and as interpreted by the judiciary, that this type of initiative is subject.

On the other hand, when the initiative modifies the Constitution, first No limit is possible. Yet there may be two types:

• Limits set beforehand by the Constitution itself: this does not mean that the initiative must respect the entire constitution (if not the initiative would be impossible); The Constitution may actually provide in one of its articles a list of specific rules that the initiative should not violate ^{[ 22 ] , [ 23 ]} ;
• In the United States, it is imperative to understand that popular initiatives only exist within the framework of states and in any case at the federal level. However, in the hierarchy of American standards, all of the federal law is greater than all of the law of states. A popular initiative is therefore zero if it is contrary to the federal constitution or a federal law, even if it modifies the constitution of the State ^{[ 24 ]} . American popular initiatives are therefore subject to all rights and freedoms of the Bill of Rights as interpreted by the United States Supreme Court ^{[ 25 ]} . The same limit applies in Switzerland for cantonal initiatives, but not for federal initiatives.

Quorum and qualified majority [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

Finally, the institution of a qualified majority or a quorum to validate a referendum is common. In the case of a qualified majority, the referendum is then valid, and therefore legally binding, only if the share of the votes cast in favor of the proposal exceeds a predetermined threshold higher than the simple absolute majority, for example a majority two -thirds. For most quorum, validity depends on the crossing of a participation rate. This provision leads to the cancellation of the vast majority of popular initiative referendums held around the world in the countries where they are required. For Magni-Berton Raul academics and Clara Egger, “We can think that this obstacle discourages voters to use this tool, so that almost half of the referendums held in the world have been in the three countries that have no planned quorum” ^{[ 26 ]} . Participation quorum indeed resulted in the appearance of boycott strategies among opponents of a referendum project likely to win a small majority of voters. Refrain to lead to the cancellation of the result for lack of sufficient participation becoming a more effective strategy than going to the polls to vote no. Some countries therefore require lower quorum, but concerning the percentage of registrants in favor of the proposal, and not that of total participation.

Bodies ensuring compliance with limits [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

Jurisdiction [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

First of all, compliance with the limit can be ensured by a jurisdiction. This is the case in the United States and Italy.

But this type of limit is obviously controversial, because the judges are not elected: their intervention in a mechanism of direct democracy therefore violates the principle of popular sovereignty. The accusation of government of the judges ( judicial activism in English) is very possible from citizens whose initiative has been canceled.

Parliamentary limit [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

The parliamentary limit is more acceptable on the political level: parliamentarians being elected by the people, they have a legitimacy allowing them to exercise such a delicate function.

On the legal level, giving the power to interpret a norm to a political assembly is unorthodox. But the parliamentary limit does not necessarily consist of applying a written rule.

In Swiss [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

In Switzerland, only the Federal Assembly has the power to invalidate the text of a federal popular initiative (control of constitutionality does not exist in Switzerland with regard to federal laws). Since the establishment of popular initiatives, only four have been invalidated by Parliament ^{[ 22 ]} . The Assembly is not required to declare any of the text in the initiative, it can only cancel a party. The rest of the initiative is then subject to the vote. She can also oppose a counter-project, which will be subject to the vote at the same time.

“Indirect” initiatives [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

In the United States, some states apply the “indirect initiative” process ^{[ 27 ]} (which is combined, in fact, with the jurisdictional limits). Once the initiative has collected signatures, it is subject to the state’s legislature which can then decide to adopt it, in which case the referendum does not take place. If the legislature rejects the text, either it is subject directly to the people’s vote, or the persons behind the initiative will have to collect additional signatures for the initiative to be subject to the people’s vote.

Text status after adoption [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

Another delicate question involved in the popular initiative referendum is that of the status of the project once adopted by the people. This question arises in two frames.

As part of the limits [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

As part of the limits, the question is whether the initiative can be declared zero even when it has already been adopted by referendum. Here again, there seems to be a contradiction with the very principle of people’s sovereignty.

Yet in the United States and Italy, a jurisdiction can do it perfectly. In Switzerland, on the other hand, control of the Parliament can only be prerequisory: once the initiative has been adopted, it can no longer be canceled.

Within the framework of the legislative process [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

The other question relates to the possibility of modifying the initiative after its adoption according to the ordinary legislative procedure. Obviously, a new popular initiative and a new referendum can completely repeal or modify a previous text.

But must Parliament be able to do so after the people adopted the initiative by referendum?

• When the initiative has changed the Constitution, the response is generally not, because the entities that provide for the popular initiative referendum (Switzerland, American states, etc.) also provide that the referendum is compulsory to modify the Constitution.
• When the initiative has enacted a law, its modification should be possible since Parliament has the role of legislating. However, some American states wanted to avoid it by providing in their constitutions that the legislature will only be able to modify the text by a qualified majority vote or after several years. California is the only state where parliamentary modification is completely prohibited, unless the text of the initiative expressly authorizes it ^{[ 28 ]} .

Popular initiative without referendum [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

Another type of popular initiative consists of entering parliament: it is simply required to vote on the proposed measure. This is the case for the popular initiative in Spain, provided for in article 87 of the Constitution of Spain. It was recently established by the European Union with the European citizen initiative.

Often this type of initiative is qualified as simple petition (in particular by supporters of the popular initiative referendum).

Referendum revocatory against an elected official [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

In some American states and in Venezuela, there is a process to submit an elected official to the revocation of the people (called recall in English). This is a revocatory referendum of a popular initiative. Voters vote for or against revocation. If the revocation is rejected, the elected official incriminated remains in office.

In the United States, each voter votes in addition to a candidate having to replace the post holder, in the event that the revocation is adopted (even the voters voting against the revocation). If it is adopted, the candidate who obtained the most votes takes his place. One can cite as an example the recall of the Governor Gray Davis in California in 2003, which led to the election of Arnold Schwarzenegger as governor as governor ^{[ 29 ]} . In 2011, at least 150 revocatory referendums were held in the United States. At the end of these, 75 elected officials were dismissed, and 9 elected officials resigned under the threat of a revocation. Revocative referendums were organized in 17 states, in 73 different jurisdictions. Michigan has held the greatest number of referendums (at least 30). The year has seen a record for the number of revocatory referendums concerning state parliamentarians (11 elections). Three additional jurisdictions adopted the revocatory referendum in 2011 ^{[ 30 ]} .

We can cite the revocation vote to which Hugo Chávez was submitted in 2004 in Venezuela, but which finally led to its maintenance.

Among these revocatory referendums, 52 concerned a municipal council, 30 concerned a mayor, 17 concerned a school board, 11 concerned state parliamentarians, 1 concerned a prosecutor (county of York, Nebraska). The largest municipality to organize a revocatory referendum (mayor) was the county of Miami-Dade, Florida ^{[ 30 ]} .

Abrogative referendum [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

The use of the abrogative referendum allows the population to oppose a law adopted by the government. The implementation of the procedure is sometimes enough to make it go back to the latter. The 2019 Croatian popular initiative aimed at allowing the population to decide on the repeal of a government reform under 67 years of retirement age is thus lacking in the vote. Carried by the unions opposed to the reform, it manages to collect in fifteen days the signatures of just over 20% of the population registered on the electoral lists, leading to its referendum. Faced with the certain success of the repeal, the government decides to repeal the reform itself by a vote of the Parliament, making the referendum useless.

Not requiring the agreement of the executive or the legislative [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

At the end of 2018, forty -one country allow one or more of these types of referendums of popular origin at the national level without requiring the agreement of the authorities ^{[ thirty first ]} , which recently Armenia since 2015 ^{[ 32 ]} :

Most German Länder, as well as 24 of the United States, also allow them, without them being possible at the federal level ^{[ 33 ]} .

People’s referendums:

• Possible at the national level
• Possible at the infrannational level only

National popular referendums by country

Pays	Type	Signatures required	Restrictions / Details	Conditions of validity	Result (and valid)
Albania	Abrogatif	50 000 (≈1.5% of registered in 2017)	Constitutionality control. Prohibited against laws relating to the integrity of the territory of the Republic of Albania, the fundamental rights and freedoms of the person, the budget, the taxes, to the financial obligations of the State, to the declarations of implementation and at the end of the state of emergency, to declarations of war and peace, as well as to those of Amnesty.	Absolute majority + a third of the registrants in favor	Restrictive
Bolivia	Legislative	20% of registrants + 15% in each of the nine Bolivian departments	Unauthorized on subjects relating to the unity and integrity of the territory of Bolivia, human rights, taxes, internal and external security of the country, the development of laws, organization Institutions responsible for the protection of society and national defense, to the nature of the state as well as that of its relations with decentralized entities.	Absolute majority	Restrictive
	Conventional	5% of registrants	Relates to the ratification of an international treaty. This is suspended in the interval.
	Constitutional	20% of registrants	Only once per concomitant mandate of the Assembly and the President, the duration of which is five years.
Bulgaria	Legislative	400,000 in three months (≈5.7% of registered in 2017)	Unauthorized on subjects relating to articles 84, 91, 103, 130, 132 and 147 of the Constitution, taxes, taxes and contributions to Social Security, on the state budget, to the internal organization of the Assembly national, the entire law as well as international treaties, if they have already been ratified.	Absolute majority + Participation greater than that of the latest legislative elections	Restrictive
Colombia	Abrogatif	10% of registered in six months	Unauthorized against laws relating to the state budget, taxation, as well as the ratification of international treatments.	Absolute majority + 25% participation	Restrictive
Costa Rica	Legislative	5% of registered in nine months	Only once a year Prohibited within six months preceding and following a presidential election Unauthorized on the subjects relating to budget, taxation, monetary issues, pensions and public contracts and administrative acts.	Absolute majority + 30% participation	Restrictive
	Abrogatif
	Constitutional			Absolute majority of votes + 40% participation
Croatia	Legislative	10% of registered in fifteen days	Control of constitutionality by the Constitutional Court if Parliament requests it.	Absolute majority	Restrictive
	Abrogatif
	Constitutional
Equator	Legislative	5% of registered in six months	Constitutionality control. Unauthorized on subjects relating to taxation as well as the political and administrative structure of the State.	Absolute majority	Restrictive
	Abrogatif
	Revocatory	15% of registered in six months	Against the president. Can only be summoned once during his mandate. Cannot be in the first or last year of the mandate.	Absolute majority of the total valid, white and invalid votes
	Constitutional	8% of registered in six months	Constitutionality control. Cannot have the object of a modification of the nature of the State or its decentralized elements, undermine the rights guaranteed by the Constitution, or change the procedure for the amendment of the Constitution	Absolute majority
	Component	12% of registered in six months	Summons a constituent assembly. The proposal must include the voting system which will be used to elect or select the members of the Constituents as well as the general framework of the electoral process. The new Constitution prepared by the Constituent Assembly will in turn have to be the subject of a referendum.
Hungary	Legislative	200,000 in four months (≈2.5% of registered in 2018)	Authorized only in the fields of the National Assembly, which are also excluded the projects relating to a modification of the Constitution, on the state budget, national taxes, retirement or insurance contributions Disease, customs taxes and general rules relating to local taxes, national and local electoral systems, international treaties, the dissolution of the National Assembly or local assemblies, the declaration of the State of War, the State of the State of War, the State of War, the State of War, the State of War, the State of War siege, or the state of emergency, as well as the proclamation and extension of the state of preventive defense, military operations and amnesty laws.	Absolute majority + 50% participation	Restrictive
	Abrogatif
Italy	Abrogatif	500,000 in 90 days (≈1% of registered in 2018)	The period of signature collection extends from first is January to September 30 of the current year. The project is subject to constitutional control. Unauthorized against laws relating to taxation, budget, amnesty, sentence and ratification of international treaties.	Absolute majority + 50% participation	Restrictive
Kenya	Constitutional	1 000 000 (≈5.1% of registered in 2017)	Requires the support of at least one of the assemblies of the country’s 47 counties if the proposal does not relate to the supremacy of the Constitution on any other law, the integrity of the territory, popular sovereignty, national values ​​and principles of governance mentioned In article 10, the Bill of rights , the president’s mandate, the independence of the judiciary, the powers of the Parliament, the structure of decentralized entities as well as the very procedure for constitutional revision	Absolute majority + 50% participation in at least half of the counties	Restrictive
Latvia	Legislative	10% of registrants	Unauthorized on subjects relating to the state budget, taxes, taxes, loans and obligations, rail tariffs, military conscription, war declarations, peace treaties, the declaration of the start and end of The state of emergency, to mobilization and demobilization, as well as to international treaties. Parliament can possibly decide to adopt the popular proposition itself, in which case the referendum does not take place.	Absolute majority + Participation greater than that of the latest legislative elections	Restrictive
	Constitutional			Absolute majority + 50% participation
Liechtenstein	Legislative	1,000 in six weeks (≈5% of registered in 2017)	None. Parliament can nevertheless decide to vote the bill itself, in which case the referendum does not take place.	Absolute majority	Restrictive
	Abrogatif	1,000 in thirty days	Any legislative change is concerned, a single new expenditure of more than 500,000 Swiss francs or new annual expenditure of more than 250,000 Swiss francs. The implementation of the referendum suspends their entry application to a minimum until the promulgation of the results.
	Constitutional	1,500 in six weeks (≈7.5% of citizens in 2017)	None. Parliament can nevertheless decide to vote itself the amendment to two thirds of the total of its members, in which case the referendum does not take place. The delay is thirty days if the referendum aims to prevent a constitutional revision initiated by the Parliament. Also concerns international treatments and their ratification.
Lithuania	Legislative	300 000 in three months (≈12% of registered in 2016)	Authorized only in the areas under the assembly, seimas.	Absolute majority +1/3 of registrants in favor + 50% participation	Restrictive
North Macedonia	Legislative	150 000 (≈8% of registered in 2016)	Authorized only in the areas under the assembly.	Absolute majority + 50% participation	Restrictive
	Abrogatif
	Conventional
Painted	Abrogatif	10% of registrants	Constitutionality control. Prohibited against all or part of the Constitution as well as the areas linked to the treaties of the European Union or to other international treaties, electoral law, tax legislation, as well as the organization of decentralized entities.	Absolute majority + 50% participation	Restrictive
Marshall Islands	Component	25% of registrants	Relates to the summons of a constitutional convention responsible for studying the popular proposal for amendment to the Constitution.	Absolute majority	Restrictive
Mexico	Legislative	2% of registered in two years	Authorized only in the areas under the congress and judged to national importance , which the law defines as an impact on most of the territory and most of the country’s population. In addition, the projects relating to a restriction of human rights are excluded in the Constitution, on article 40 defining the country as a representative, democratic, free, free and sovereign as well as on the laws relating to the law on the Constitution. electoral, in the state budget, to the organization of national security and that of the army and its operations. The Supreme Court of Justice may have to rule on the constitutionality of the referendum proposal if the Congress requests it.	Absolute majority + 40% participation	Restrictive
	Abrogatif
Micronesia	Constitutional	10% of registered in at least 3 of the 4 states	If several contradictory amendments are adopted simultaneously, that which has won the most votes prevail.	Majority qualified by 75% in at least 3 of the 4 states	Restrictive
Moldova	Legislative	200 000 in two to three months (≈6.8% of registered in 2014)	Control of constitutionality, on the consistent opinion of the Constitutional Court, adopted by the vote of at least 4 judges. Unauthorized on projects leading to a violation of human rights and fundamental freedoms. The provisions relating to the sovereign, independent and unitary nature of the State, as well as those relating to the permanent neutrality of the State require a number of votes in favor of the majority of the total of the citizens registered on the electoral lists. A referendum can only be organized on the same subject after a period of two years.	Absolute majority + 33% participation	Restrictive
	Constitutional	200 000 in two to three months, coming from at least half of the 40 arrondissements, including at least 20,000 in each of them
Nicaragua	Legislative	50,000 (≈1.5% of registered in 2016)	A validity control is carried out by the Supreme Electoral Council	Absolute majority	Restrictive
	Constitutional
New Zealand	Legislative	10% of registered in twelve months	N/A	Absolute majority	Non-binding
Uganda	Legislative	10% of registrants, in at least a third of the districts	Referendums can focus on any subject, with the explicit exception of projects against the fundamental rights and freedoms of man	Absolute majority	Restrictive
	Abrogatif
	Constitutional		Requires being approved by two thirds of the total members of the Parliament if the project concerns the articles on the sovereignty of the people, the primacy of the Constitution, the prohibition to derogate from human rights and freedoms, the system Policy, the latter’s revision procedure, the prohibition of the Single Party regime, the functioning of the Parliament, the duration of the presidential mandate, the independence of the judiciary and the legal recognition of traditional leaders.
Palaos	Legislative	10% of registrants	Authorized only in the fields of the federal parliament. Must be organized at the same time as the general elections, which take place every four years.	Absolute majority	Restrictive
	Abrogatif
	Constitutional	25% of registrants	Must be organized at the same time as the general elections, which take place every four years.	Absolute majority in at least twelve of the sixteen palaos states.
Peru	Legislative	10% of registrants	The projects relating to a restriction on fundamental rights of the individual are excluded, on the areas relating to taxes and budgets, as well as on the international treaties already in force. In the event of a valid and favorable result, Parliament can only change the law or amendment once spent a period of two years, except via the organization of a new referendum, or by a two -thirds vote. In the event of a negative or invalid result, a new popular initiative cannot be implemented on the same subject as a period of two years.	Absolute majority + 30% of registrants in favor	Restrictive
	Abrogatif
	Constitutional
Philippines	Legislative	10% of registrants + 3% in each of the legislative constituencies	Authorized in the fields of Congress	Absolute majority	Restrictive
	Abrogatif
	Constitutional	12% of registrants + 3% in each of the legislative constituencies	Can only be initiated by the population only once every five years.
San Marino	Legislative	1.5% of registered in 45 days	Authorized in the fields of the Parliament, to the exclusion of projects going against the provisions of the Constitution, those relating to the state budget, taxes and taxation, amnesties, the right to vote, the right to work, freedom of movement and any other violation or restriction of human rights, as well as the ratification of international treatments	Absolute majority	Restrictive
	Abrogatif	1.5% of registered in 90 days
Serbia	Legislative	100,000 in seven days (≈1.5% of registered in 2016)	Authorized only in the fields relating to the skills of the National Assembly, to which are also excluded the projects relating to international treaties, freedoms and human rights, the rights of minorities, tax legislation, the budget of the State, the declaration of the state of emergency, the laws of amnesty and the electoral law of the assembly	Absolute majority + 50% participation	Restrictive
	Abrogatif
Slovakia	Legislative	350 000 (≈8% of registered in 2016)	Control of constitutionality by the Constitutional Court if the president requests it. Unauthorized in the fields of fundamental freedoms and rights, taxes as well as the state budget. In the event of a valid and favorable result, the law cannot be modified by the Parliament or be the subject of a new referendum only after a period of three years.	Absolute majority + 50% participation	Restrictive
	Abrogatif
	Constitutional
Slovenia	Abrogatif	2,500 then 40,000 in a month (≈2.3% of registered in 2017)	Unauthorized against laws relating to the integrity of the territory of the Republic of Macedonia, to the fundamental rights and freedoms of the person, to the budget, to taxes, to the financial obligations of the State, to the declarations of implementation and at the end of the state of emergency, to declarations of war and peace, as well as to those of amnesty	Absolute majority + 20% of registrants in favor	Restrictive
Suisse	Abrogatif	50,000 in a hundred days (≈ 0.9% of citizens in 2018)	Applies to the introduction and revision of laws. The one hundred days short from its publication in the federal sheet. Can also be triggered by eight cantons out of the twenty-six of the country.	Absolute majority	Restrictive
	Constitutional	100,000 in eighteen months (≈ 1.8% of citizens in 2018)	The proposal can be written so as to be ready to be adopted or be conceived in general terms, in which case its authors leave it in Parliament to write it.	Absolute majority if in general terms Majority of voters and cantons if written
Taiwan	Legislative	0.01% then 1.5% of registered in six months	Referendums can only be organized in two years. They must be validated by the Central Electoral Commission (CEC). The proposals modify the constitution as well as the name, the national anthem, the flag and the borders of the country are excluded. If the electoral law exceptionally lowers the right to vote from 20 to 18 years old during these referendums, they are also explicitly prohibited to relate to a change in the legal age of the right to vote.	Absolute majority + 25% of registrants in favor	Restrictive
	Abrogatif
Togo	Legislative	500 000 (≈15.8% of registered in 2018) in at least 20 of the 39 prefectures, with maximum 50,000 each.	Subject to a constitutionality control on the part of the Constitutional Court.	Absolute majority	Restrictive
	Constitutional
Ukraine	Legislative	3,000,000 (≈ 10% of citizens in 2019) in three months including 100,000 per oblast	Cannot relate to a bill concerning taxes, budget or amnesty.	Absolute majority + 50% participation	Restrictive
	Abrogatif
	Revocatory		Can, for example, be against Parliament, the rada, or the president. In the latter case, however, a favorable vote of two thirds of the total of the Rada members is required.	Absolute majority + 66.66% participation
Uruguay	Abrogatif	5% of registered in 180 days, then 25%	Unauthorized against decisions concerning the state budget, as well as areas relating to presidential prerogatives. The collection procedure can only take place within one year from the date of publication of the law. If the petitioners do not immediately bring together the signatures of 25% of the registrants, but more than 5%, a prereferendum is organized by secret bulletin in the polling stations of the country’s major cities to allow to try the second threshold .	Absolute majority, including white votes.	Restrictive
	Constitutional	10% of registrants	Parliament can possibly propose a counter project, which will be subject to the vote at the same time as the popular proposal.	Absolute majority + 35% of registrants in favor	Restrictive
Venezuela	Legislative	10% of registrants	Consultative referendums. Can also be organized at the level of municipalities and states of Venezuela	Absolute majority	Non-binding
	Abrogatif	Loop : 10% of registrants, decree : 5%	Unauthorized against the budget relating to the budget, those establishing or modifying taxes, or relating to credit, amnesty, human rights as well as international treaties. Can only be organized once on the same subject per mandate of five years of the Assembly.	Absolute majority + 40% participation	Restrictive
	Revocatory	20% of registrants	Against the president or any other elected official. Can only be summoned once during its mandate, once the first half of it has passed.	A number of votes for the higher revocation than that collected by the president during the last election + 25% participation
	Conventional	15% of registrants	Relates to the ratification of an international treaty. This is suspended in the interval.	Absolute majority
	Constitutional		The constitutional revision project may be submitted in full referendum, or be subject to separate questions if the president, a third of the parliament or 5% of voters request it. Can only be organized once per mandate of five years of the Assembly.
	Component		Summons a constituent assembly. The new Constitution prepared by the Constituent Assembly will in turn have to be the subject of a referendum.

Requiring the agreement of the executive or the legislative [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

Pays	Type	Signatures required	Restrictions / Details	Authority consent	Conditions of validity	Result (and valid)
Pologs	Legislative	100 000	Projects of citizen laws authorized in the fields of parliament, excluding the state budget and constitutional changes.	Obliges the parliamentary legislative journey; A member of the Popular Initiative Committee participates in “work” in the two chambers of Parliament [ first ] , [ 2 ] .	Parliament	Non-binding

Overall data [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

According to the statement carried out by Raul Magni-Berton academics and Clara Egger, 306 popular initiative referendums were organized between 1995 and 2019 at the national level in the 36 countries where the system is in force ^{[ 26 ] , [ 34 ]} . The system is in force ^{[When ?]} in about forty ^[evasive] of country according to direct-democracy-navigator.org ^{[Who ?] [ 33 ]} . In 18 countries where it is in force in 2019, the system has never given rise to a referendum ^{[ 26 ] , [ 34 ]} . Two -thirds of the referendums come from countries where the popular initiative is possible at the constitutional level, which shows according to them that “The [Citizen Initiative Referendum] opened the door to direct legislation” ^{[ 26 ]} . Besides, “None of the countries that experienced more than a referendum has a signature threshold that exceeds 500,000 voters” ^{[ 26 ]} . Raul Magni-Berton also notes that no RIC was organized in a country requiring a number of signatures exceeding the 5% threshold of the electoral body ^{[ 35 ]} .

France [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

There is no possibility in France in France to carry out popular initiative referendums. Several political movements, however, support its implementation, in particular within the framework of the 2022 presidential election ^{[ 36 ]} . Hope-Ric, carried by Clara Egger, makes her only program line ^{[ 37 ]} . Jean Lassalle, within the resistons, recorded in October 2021 a proposal for a constitutional law relating to the establishment of the citizen initiative referendum ^{[ 38 ]} .

Italy [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

In Italy, only referendums of an abrogative nature can be triggered by voters alone. Article 75 of the Constitution provides that such a ballot can be at the request of 500,000 voters or at least five regional councils. It can only relate to the total or partial repeal of a law or an act having the value of law, except those concerning taxation, budget, amnesty, punishment, and ratification of international treaties .

The petition is deposited with the Chancellery of the Supreme Court of Cassation, which examines its validity, followed by the Constitutional Court which ensures the conformity of the object of the referendum with the Constitution. In the event of agreement on the part of the latter, the ballot is summoned by the President of the Republic between the April 15 and the June 15 .

The repeal is acquired if the ” Yes ” Waves it with the absolute majority of the votes cast, on the condition of crossing the quorum of participation of 50% of the registered on the electoral lists.

Liechtenstein [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

Liechtenstein is, with Switzerland, the European country where the tools of direct democracy are the most developed ^{[ 39 ]} .

Within the framework of article 64 of the Constitution ^{[ 40 ]} , citizens can propose a bill or a revision of the Constitution. To be valid, this popular initiative must harvest within six weeks 1,000 signatures of citizens in the case of a legislative project or 1500 if it is constitutional ^{[ 39 ]} . The Liechtenstein population was in 2013 of just under 37,000 people, or thresholds of 2.7 and 4% respectively.

Once the number of signatures has reached, Parliament decides on the initiative. If he accepts it, the initiative comes into force. If it refuses it, it is subject to the vote and the citizens decide. In the case of a project modifying the Constitution, a quorum of two thirds of the members of the Parliament is necessary for the initiative to be validated without being the subject of a referendum ^{[ 39 ]} .

Municipalities may also use this tool if at least three of them request it by a unanimous deliberation of their municipal assembly in the case of a bill, or at least four in the case of an amendment constitutional.

Within the framework of article 66 of the Constitution ^{[ 40 ]} , citizens can also rule in the aftermath On the decisions adopted by Parliament. Any modification of the Constitution, legislative change, unique new expenditure of more than 500,000 Swiss francs or new annual expenditure of more than 250,000 Swiss francs is concerned. If 1,000 signatures are collected in 30 days (1500 for changes in the Constitution or international treaties), an optional referendum of popular origin is organized and the decision of the people is binding.

Parliament may decide on itself to submit such a decision to a referendum which is then of parliamentary origin, but it is never obliged by law. Unlike the Swiss neighbor, Liechtenstein is therefore not subject to compulsory referendums in certain predefined areas, in particular constitutional ^{[ 39 ]} .

Like initiatives, municipalities may use an optional referendum if at least three of them request it by a unanimous deliberation of their municipal assembly in the case of a bill, or at least four in the case of a constitutional amendment.

There is no quorum system for a referendum to be valid. Abstention therefore has no influence on the ballot, and cannot be used as a tool to invalidate the result by its opponents ^{[ 39 ]} . The prince of Liechtenstein can however put his veto on a referendum by refusing to promulgate the law.

North Macedonia [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

The possibility of popular referendum in Northern Macedonia is provided for by the 1991 Constitution. In accordance with article 73 of the Constitution, the Assembly is indeed required to proclaim a referendum if the proposal was submitted by a minimum of 150 000 voters. This figure represented a little more than 8% of the total registrants on the Macedonian electoral lists in 2016. The decision approved by referendum is imperative ^{[ 41 ]} .

The bill will however be considered as validly approved if the yes prevails by an absolute majority (50%+1) and that the participation quorum of 50% of the registrants is crossed ^{[ 41 ]} .

New Zealand [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

A law of 1993, known as Citizens Initiated Referenda Act 1993 allows the neo -zealian population to implement proposals of popular origin subject to referendum ^{[ 42 ]} , to the character nevertheless non -binding. Signatures of at least 10% of all voters registered on the electoral lists must for this be gathered within one year. In 2017, a total of 3,298,009 voters were registered on the lists, which is equivalent to a threshold of 329,801 signatures ^{[ 43 ]} , or around 900 signatures per day over a year. In practice, this number is, however, higher to overcome the variable number of invalid or double signatures.

The New Zelangian law requires petitioners to submit their projects to the Clerk of the House of Representatives and pay a payment of $ 500 New Zealand dollars ^{[ 44 ]} . The latter himself determines the formulation of the question, which can vary significantly from that proposed originally, and established the counting of the signatures to verify its validity. Within one month following the presentation of a petition valid in the Chamber, the date of the referendum is established. This must take place within twelve months, unless the Chamber decides to postpone it by a voting by a majority of 3/4 of its members. No quorum of positive voting or participation is required. However, Parliament is not required to implement a proposal validated by voters.

Slovenia [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

Referendums of popular origin against a law passed by Parliament are possible in Slovenia via articles 90-1, 97 and 99 of the Slovenian Constitution which organizes the legal framework for this form of direct democracy. These types of referendum are however only possible there, against a law, preventing its implementation, without allowing the contrary to propose a law, the Parliament retaining this prerogative.

The meeting of a minimum of 2,500 signatures is required to launch the process against a bill approved by the National Assembly. The organizers must then collect at least 40,000 signatures within one month from their request – in 2017 around 2.3% of the total of the voters registered on the electoral lists. If they succeed, the Slovenian government then has the obligation to organize the referendum, the result of which is legally binding. Nevertheless, to be valid, a negative result must accumulate two conditions: the total voice for the « Non » must obtain the absolute majority of the votes cast and reach the quorum of 20% of the total of the voters registered on the electoral lists ^{[ 45 ]} .

Suisse [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

Taiwan [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

The possibility of referendums in Taiwan is provided for by the Constitution and the electoral law. Can therefore be implemented at the national level of constitutional referendums, necessarily of parliamentary origin, as well as referendums on bills, of parliamentary or popular origin. A reform of 2017 greatly facilitated the organization of the latter.

A popular referendum project now requires at first bringing together the signatures of 0.01% of the population listed on the electoral lists (0.1 before 2017). Once the procedure thus triggered, the petitioners must then bring together within six months the signatures of 1.5% of the registrants (5% before 2017) then have the project validated with the Central Electoral Commission (CEC), of which the authorization conditions have been relaxed in relation to the preceding Referendum examination committee ^{[ forty six ] , [ 47 ]} . If it gives its agreement, the referendum is put to the vote. For the result to be legally valid, the yes to the bill must still bring together the absolute majority of votes and reach the quorum of 25% of registrants (50% before 2017). As detailed in article 29 of the referendum law, it is therefore not a quorum of participation, but a positive voting quorum compared to the total registrants ^{[ 48 ]} .

However, are excluded from the popular path the referendums modifying the constitution as well as the name, the national anthem, the flag and the borders of the country. If the electoral law exceptionally lowers the right to vote from 20 to 18 years old during these referendums, they are also explicitly prohibited to relate to a change in the legal age of the right to vote ^{[ 49 ] , [ 50 ]} .

The thresholds are calculated from the number of registered on the electoral lists during the last presidential election, or 18,782,991 in 2016, which corresponds to thresholds of 1,878 (0.1%) and 281,744 (1, 5%) registered. If it is approved, the referendum must be subject to the population vote within six months. If a national election is planned in this time, the referendum must be organized on the same day. If the proposal is rejected, it cannot be subject to a signature collection again that a period of two years ^{[ 48 ]} .

Uruguay [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

The referendums of popular origin of the abrogative or constitutional type are possible in Uruguay via articles 79 and 331 of the Constitution. For an abrogative referendum, signatures of at least 25% of all voters registered on the electoral lists must be gathered. The result of the referendum is legally binding, and does not require to be considered valid to cross a quorum of participation or a qualified majority, the absolute majority is sufficient. Abrogative referendums cannot however be triggered against decisions concerning the state budget, as well as areas relating to presidential prerogatives ^{[ 51 ] , [ 52 ]} .

For constitutional referendums, signatures of at least 10% of registrants are required. Parliament can offer counter -projects that will be subject to the vote at the same time as the popular proposal. Although legally binding, the project must be considered valid to collect the absolute majority as well as a number of votes in its favor at least equal to 35% of the total registrants, which amounts into practice to a quorum of participation of 70% ^{[ 51 ]} .

Bibliography [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

• Raul Magni-Berton et Clara Egger, RIC: The citizen initiative referendum explained to all: at the heart of direct democracy , Limoges, Fyp editions, coll. “Presence/social issues”, 2019 , 192 p. (ISBN  978-2-36405-187-4 ) .

Related articles [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

external links [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

• Notice in a generalist dictionary or encyclopedia :
• BallotPedia.org is an American Wiki site on American policy
• Recallelections is a blog of an American academic dedicated to the exhaustive study and monitoring of revocatory referendum procedures (especially US), with syntheses per year