A referendum (plural: referendums or referenda) or
plebiscite is a direct vote in which an entire electorate is asked to
either accept or reject a particular proposal. This may be the adoption
of a new constitution, a constitutional amendment, a law, the recall of
an elected official or simply a specific government policy. Certain
kinds of referenda held in some states of the United States are referred
to as ballot measures or propositions. The referendum or plebiscite is a
form of direct democracy.
Terminology
The terms referendum and plebiscite are often used interchangeably but
the term plebiscite is usually preferred in circumstance in which a
decision is being made on fundamental issues of sovereignty, such as in
determining national borders or adopting a new constitution. Plebiscite
is also often the term used to describe a direct vote held by a dictator
or an undemocratic regime, in circumstances in which a free and fair
vote is impossible. Plebiscites held by undemocratic governments may
request approval for a radical governmental decree, or of the general
policies of the government. The term referendum is usually preferred to
describe routine votes held in liberal democracies. Thus the direct vote
that adopted the constitution of the modern Republic of Ireland is
referred to as a 'plebiscite' while every subsequent such direct vote
has been described as a 'referendum'.
Referendums and referenda are both commonly used as plurals of
referendum. However the use of referenda is deprecated by the Oxford
English Dictionary which advises that:
Referendums is logically preferable as a plural form meaning ballots on
one issue (as a Latin gerund, referendum has no plural). The Latin
plural gerundive referenda, meaning things to be referred, necessarily
connotes a plurality of issues.
Procedure and status
Referendums may be either binding or non-binding. A non-binding
referendum is merely consultative or advisory. It is left to the
government or legislature to interpret the results of a non-binding
referendum and it may even choose to ignore them. Nonetheless, actual
political circumstances in countries that hold non-binding referendums
are such that the results of such a referendum are usually honoured. In
contrast, a number of nations permit binding referendums in which the
result is legally enforceable.
A foundational referendum or plebiscite may be drafted by a constituent
assembly before being put to voters. In other circumstances a referendum
is usually initiated either by a legislature or by citizens themselves
by means of a petition. The process of initiating a referendum by
petition is known as the popular or citizen's initiative. In the United
States the term referendum is often reserved for a direct vote initiated
by a legislature while a vote originating in a petition of citizens is
referred to as an "initiative," "ballot measure" or "proposition."
In countries in which a referendum must be initiated by parliament it is
sometimes mandatory to hold a binding referendum on certain proposals,
such as constitutional amendments. In countries, such as the United
Kingdom, in which referendums are neither mandatory nor binding there
may, nonetheless, exist an unwritten convention that certain important
constitutional changes will be put to a referendum and that the result
will be respected.
In most referendums it is sufficient for a measure to be approved by a
simple majority of voters in order for it to be carried. However a
referendum may also require the support of a super-majority, such as
two-thirds of votes cast. In Lithuania certain proposals must be
endorsed by a three-quarters majority.
In some countries there is also a requirement that there be a certain
minimum turn-out of the electorate in order for the result of a
referendum to be considered valid. This is intended to ensure that the
result is representative of the will of the electorate and is analogous
to the quorum required in a committee or legislature. An alternative is
to insist on a certain minimum absolute number of yes votes before a
measure can be deemed to have been carried—or of no votes if it is to be
deemed vetoed.
The franchise in a referendum is not necessarily the same as that for
elections. For example, in the Republic of Ireland only citizens may
vote in a referendum whereas British citizens resident in the state are
entitled to vote in general elections.
Criticisms
Although some advocates of direct democracy would have the referendum
become the dominant institution of government, in practice, in almost
all cases, the referendum exists solely as a complement to the system of
representative democracy, in which most major decisions are made by an
elected legislature. Furthermore, in most jurisdictions that practice
them, referendums are relatively rare occurrences and are restricted to
issues of major importance. Nonetheless the referendum is sometimes the
subject of controversy.
Advocates of the referendum argue that certain decisions are best taken
out of the hands of political elites and determined directly by the
people. Some adopt a strict definition of democracy in which elected
parliaments are merely a necessary expedient needed to make governance
possible in the large, modern nation-state; direct democracy is
nonetheless preferable and so a referendum must always take preference
over a decision of parliament.
Other advocates insist that the principle of popular sovereignty demands
that certain foundational questions, such as the adoption or amendment
of a constitution, the secession of a state or the altering of national
boundaries, be determined with the directly expressed consent of the
people.
Criticisms from representative democracy
Opponents of the referendum argue that representative democracy is
superior to direct democracy. As often conceived by such opponents,
representative democracy is a system in which elected officials are the
exercisers of independent judgement rather than merely delegates bound
to robotically carry out the wishes of voters. Some opponents therefore
insist that the referendum is used by politicians as a way of abrogating
responsibility in the taking of difficult or controversial decisions.
It is also argued that voters in a referendum may be driven by transient
whims rather than careful deliberation, or that they may not be
sufficiently well informed to take decisions on complicated or technical
issues. Voters might furthermore be swayed by strong personalities, or
the adverse influence of propaganda or expensive advertising campaigns.
Some argue that tools such as the referendum may lead to the "tyranny of
the majority" and to the erosion of the rights of individuals and
minorities.
Some opposition to the referendum has arisen from its use by dictators
such as Napoleon, Hitler and Mussolini who, it is argued, used the
plebiscite to clothe oppressive policies in a veneer of legitimacy.
Hitler's use of the plebiscite is one reason why, since World War II,
there has been no provision in Germany for the holding of referendums at
the federal level.
Many of the arguments used by those who oppose the referendum are
summarised in the following comment made in an interview in 2003 by the
British politician Chris Patten concerning the possibility of a
referendum in the UK on the European Union Constitution:
I think referendums are awful.. they were the favourite form of
plebiscitary democracy of Mussolini and Hitler. They undermine
Westminster [parliament]. What they ensure, as we saw in the last
election, is if you have a referendum on an issue politicians during an
election campaign say oh we're not going to talk about that, we don't
need to talk about that, that's all for the referendum. So during the
last election campaign the euro was hardly debated. I think referendums
are fundamentally anti-democratic in our system and I wouldn't have
anything to do with them. On the whole, governments only concede them
when governments are weak (BBC, 2004).
Other criticisms
A further perceived flaw of the referendum is that in some circumstances
the democratic spirit of the referendum may be flouted by the repeated
submission to the referendum of a proposal until it is eventually
endorsed, perhaps due to a low turn-out or public fatigue with the
issue. This is especially a problem where a proposal may be difficult to
reverse, such as secession from a larger country or the abolition of a
monarchy. The repeated holding of a referendum on a single issue has
been pejoratively referred to as the phenomenon of the "never-end-um".
Quebec in Canada is an example; a referendum in 1980 rejected
"sovereignty-association" by a vote of 59-41 percent against; a second
in 1995 rejected, by 51-49 percent, a mandate to allow the provincial
government to negotiate sovereignty with an undefined relationship with
Canada based on a common currency. The Parti Québécois (PQ) intends, it
says, to hold referenda on the issue until it wins, its message being
that it can keep holding them until it wins, but no more have to be held
after that. The only apparent restraint is that the original law,
adopted in 1979, allows only one referendum on an issue between any two
consecutive elections. The PQ's apparent strategy is to only hold the
referendum when it believes winning conditions exist.
Finally some critics of the referendum attack the usual practice of only
offering the electorate two options, of either accepting or rejecting a
proposal, in a referendum.
Multiple-choice referendums
A referendum usually offers the electorate only two choices, either to
accept or reject a proposal, but this need not necessarily be the case.
In Switzerland, for example, multiple choice referendums are common; two
multiple choice referendums held in Sweden, in 1957 and 1980, offered
voters a choice of three options; and in 1977 a referendum held in
Australia to determine a new national anthem was held in which voters
were presented with four choices.
In June 1948, a multiple-choice referendum was held in Newfoundland,
with three choices: join Canada as a province, be restored as a dominion
under the British crown, or continue with the commission administration
in effect since 1934. With the commission option eliminated, a
subsequent referendum the next month saw the voters choose to join
Canada.
A multiple choice referendum poses the problem of how the result is to
be determined if no single option receives the support of an absolute
majority (i.e., more than half) of voters. This can be resolved by
applying voting systems designed for single winner elections to a
multiple-choice referendum.
Swiss referendums get around this problem by offering a separate vote on
each of the multiple options as well as an additional decision about
which of the multiple options should be preferred. In the Swedish case,
in both referendums the 'winning' option was chosen by the Single Member
Plurality ("first past the post") system. In other words the winning
option was deemed to be that supported by a plurality, rather than an
absolute majority, of voters. In the 1977 Australian referendum the
winner was chosen by the system of Instant Run-off Voting (also known as
the 'Alternative Vote').
Some groups, such as the Northern Ireland De Borda Institute, advocate
the conduct of referendums using the Borda count form of preferential
voting, and refer to such a vote as a Borda 'preferendum'. The De Borda
Institute argues that the Borda count would produce results based on
consensus rather than majoritarianism; it is therefore suggested for use
in plebiscites held in areas of conflict such as Northern Ireland, the
Balkans or Kashmir. Critics of the Borda count argue that it is
particularly susceptible to tactical voting and to the tactical
nomination of candidates, and that it may produce results that are
opposed by a majority of voters.
Referendums by country
Australia
Main article: Referendums in Australia
Approval in a referendum is necessary in order to amend the Australian
constitution. A bill must first be passed by both houses of Parliament
or, in certain limited circumstances, by only one house of Parliament,
and is then submitted to a referendum. If a majority of those voting, as
well as separate majorities in each of a majority of states, vote in
favour of the amendment, it is presented for Royal Assent, given in the
Queen's name by the Governor-General. Out of the 43 referenda held since
federation in 1901, only eight have been passed, making the Australian
referendum system one of the most restrictive in the develop world. Due
to the specific mention of referenda in the Australian constitution,
non-constitutional referenda are usually termed plebescites in
Australia.
Canada
Main article: Referendums in Canada
Referendums are rare in Canada and only three have ever occurred at the
federal level. The most recent was a referendum in 1992 on a package of
proposed constitutional measures known as the Charlottetown Accord.
Although the Constitution of Canada does not expressly require that
amendments be approved by referendum some argue that, in light of the
precedent set by the Charlottetown Accord referendum, this may have
become an unwritten convention.
Referendums can also occur at the provincial level. The 1980 Quebec
referendum and 1995 Quebec referendum on the secession of Québec are
notable cases.
Republic of Ireland
Main article: Amendments to the Constitution of Ireland
The current Constitution of Ireland was adopted by plebiscite on 1 July
1937. In the Republic of Ireland it is mandatory that every
constitutional amendment be approved by referendum and since 1937 over
twenty constitutional referendums have occurred. Constitutional
amendments are first adopted by both Houses of the Oireachtas
(parliament), then submitted to a referendum and finally signed into law
by the President. However the role of the president is merely ceremonial
and she cannot refuse to sign an amendment into law that has been
legitimately approved in a referendum. The constitution also provides
for a referendum on an ordinary law known as the 'ordinary referendum'.
However such a referendum can only take place in rare circumstances and
so none has yet occurred.
Italy
Main article: Referendums in Italy
The constitution of Italy provides for binding referendums. A referendum
can be called in order to abrogate totally or partially a law, but only
at the request of 500,000 electors or five regional councils. The
referendum is valid only if at least a majority of electors goes to the
polling station. It is forbidden to call a referendum regarding
financial laws or laws relating to pardons or the ratification of
international treaties. Any citizen entitled to vote in an election to
the Chamber of Deputies may participate in a referendum.
Sweden
Main article: Referendums in Sweden
The Constitution of Sweden provides for both binding and non-binding
referendums. Since the introduction of parliamentary democracy six
referendums have been held in Sweden: the first was on prohibition in
1922 and the most recent on euro membership in 2003. All have been
non-binding, consultative referendums. Two, in 1957 and 1980, were
multiple choice referendums.
Switzerland
In Switzerland, there are binding referendums at federal, cantonal and
municipal level. They are a central feature of Swiss political life.
There are two types of referendums:
* Facultative referendum: Any federal law, certain other federal
resolutions, and international treaties that are either perpetual and
irredeemable, joinings of an international organization, or that change
Swiss law may be subject to a facultative referendum if at least 50,000
people or eight cantons have petitioned to do so within 100 days. In
cantons and municipalities, the required number of people is smaller,
and there may be additional causes for a faculatative referendum, e.g.,
expenditures that exceed a certain amount of money. The facultative
referendum is the most usual type of referendum, and it is mostly
carried out by political parties or by interest groups.
* Obligatory referendum: There must be a referendum on any amendments to
the constitution and on any joining of a multinational community or
organization for collective security. In many municipalities,
expenditures that exceed a certain amount of money also are subject to
the obligatory referendum. Constitutional amendments are either proposed
by the parliament or the cantons, or they may be proposed by citizens'
initiatives, which—on the federal level—need to collect 100,000 valid
signatures within 18 months, and must not contradict international laws
or treaties. Often, parliament elaborates a counter-proposal to an
initiative, leading to a multiple-choice referendum. Very few such
initiatives pass the vote, but more often, the parliamentary counter
proposal is approved.
The possibility of facultative referendums forces the parliament to
search for a compromise between the major interest groups. In many
cases, the mere threat of a facultative referendum or of an initiative
is enough to make the parliament adjust a law. The referendums slow
politics down.
The votes on referendums are always held on a Sunday, typically three or
four times a year, and in most cases, the votes concern several
referendums at the same time, often at different political levels
(federal, cantonal, municipial). Elections are as well often combined
with referendums. However, the percentage of voters is generally very
low, about 20 to 30 percent unless there is an election.
The decisions made in referendums tend to be conservative. Citizens'
initiatives are usually not passed. Even referendums on tax cuts are
often not passed.
United Kingdom
Main article: Referendums in the United Kingdom
Owing to the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty a binding referendum
cannot be held in the United Kingdom (UK). Referendums are rare and only
once has a referendum proposal been put to the entire electorate of the
UK; this was a referendum in 1975 on membership of the European Economic
Community. However many referendums have been held in individual regions
within the United Kingdom on issues relating to devolution and the
status of Northern Ireland. There have also been referendums held at the
local level on proposals for directly elected local mayors. As of 2004
the British government is currently committed to holding a UK-wide
referendum on the new EU Constitution, as well as on any plan to adopt
the euro as the UK's currency or to change from 'first past the post' to
an alternative electoral system. In addition, under the 1972 Local
Government Act, there is a little-known provision under which
non-binding local referendums on any issue can be called by small groups
of voters.
Other nations
* France: In France a constitutional amendment must be approved by
either a super-majority in parliament or by the people in a referendum.
* United States: There is no provision for the holding of referendums at
the federal level in the United States. However the constitutions of 24
states and many local and city governments provide for referendums and
citizen's initiatives. The most famous U.S. state initiative is probably
California's Proposition 13 which severely limited property tax
increases.
