Europe Must Be Constituted by Its Citizens: An Open Letter to Europeans and the Press

As Europe struggles with decision-making paralysis, geopolitical fragility, and institutional stagnation, the Federal Alliance of European Federalists (FAEF) addresses citizens and independent media across the continent. In this open letter, Dr. Manuel Galiñanes presents a direct call to action: moving beyond the limitations of treaty-based diplomacy toward a democratic federation—built on citizen consent, constitutional clarity, and an independent press.

By Manuel Galiñanes |

To the citizens of Europe, in particular its journalists, editors, publishers, broadcasters, and independent media:

Europe is approaching the point at which delaying tough political decisions has become dangerous in itself. The European Union (EU) has transformed a continent torn apart by wars into a peaceful area of the rule of law, cooperation, free movement, and prosperity. It has promoted democracy, defended human rights, created a single market and currency, and given European states instruments to shape outcomes they could not achieve on their own. These accomplishments are impressive and deserve respect. They must not be undermined.

While the Union’s success deserves appreciation, it must not prevent a balanced assessment of what the EU can no longer achieve today. Europe was constructed as an alliance of sovereign states. Europe remains a union more integrated than an international organization but not as unified, democratic, or politically competent as a federation. Power is divided between national governments and EU institutions; responsibility is unclear; decisions are negotiated and subject to vetoes. This configuration worked for phased economic integration under stable conditions. It is no longer adequate amid war, geopolitical competition, climate instability, technological breakthroughs, demographic change, democratic decline, and the growing dominance of private power.

Therefore, Europe’s major challenge is to create a democratic structure that can translate citizens’ interests into public policy.

The limitations of the present-day European Union

The EU faces several major cross-national problems, yet the Union’s top body still consists of national entities. Foreign policy, defense policy, energy security, migration, industrial policy, tax policy, digital policy, environmental policy, public health, and relations with the rest of the world are difficult to manage effectively through 27 national strategies loosely coordinated from Brussels.

The implications are clear. The Union can set ambitious goals but lacks the resources, competence, and unity to implement them. While it promises strategic autonomy, it relies on other players for security, energy, advanced technology, and mineral resources. While it regulates the Continental market, it cannot formulate a coherent foreign policy. While it promotes democratic values, it applies them selectively when member states violate judicial independence, pluralism, and media freedom. And while it calls for solidarity on migration and asylum, it delegates responsibility to bordering states and allows national politics to block solutions.

It is not just about leadership. It stems from poor institutional design. The Council of the EU requires unanimity on the most important matters – common foreign and security policy, the Union’s resources and budget, the expansion of EU citizens’ rights, and certain aspects of taxation, justice, and social policy. Every government can veto decisions in these areas.[1] Treaty amendments require unanimity and national ratification.[2] An institution that allows a single government to veto decisions affecting hundreds of millions cannot implement effective, comprehensive policies.

It is not just about effectiveness; it is about democratic accountability. Citizens elect the European Parliament, which lacks the full powers of a sovereign legislature. The executive is shared among the Commission, the European Council, the Council, and national governments. When something goes wrong, everyone can blame someone else. Citizens can vote, but they do not know who governs and makes decisions, or whom to hold accountable. This breeds frustration and indifference, giving people the illusion that returning to national institutions can solve everything.

However, a sovereign nation-state can no longer control the forces shaping people’s lives. Money, digital platforms, CO₂ emissions, organized crime, pandemics, military threats, logistics, and artificial intelligence do not recognize borders. National democracy without power becomes a symbol; European power without a definite constitutional democracy remains undemocratic. The answer is to merge democracy and power where the problems arise.

Europe needs a Federation: Unity without Uniformity

The next step in Europe’s constitutional evolution is to create a democratic federation.

Federation does not imply the disappearance of Europe’s nations, languages, cultures, and political traditions, nor does it imply centralizing decision-making in a remote capital. The proper understanding of federalism entails the distribution and decentralization of power. Only competences that require joint efforts are transferred to the common European institutions, while national, regional, and local authorities remain autonomous in all other areas. This is the principle of subsidiarity, established in the Constitution, which guarantees that decisions are made as close to citizens as possible, but at the European level when the nature and consequences of the decisions require it.[3]

By becoming a federation, Europe will replace diplomatic negotiations with a constitutional division of powers. It will have a democratic parliament representing both citizens and federated states; a limited executive; an independent judiciary; the necessary funding; and mechanisms to monitor the government. As a federation, Europe will adopt comprehensive policies on security, foreign policy, climate change, energy, migration, innovation, economics, and other matters. It will also clarify the competencies of the federation and its member states.

This is not merely an abstract vision. A Constitution of the Federated States of Europe already exists and is freely available at www.earthconstitution.world and through the Federal Alliance of European Federalists.[4] A citizens’ convention drafted this Constitution not to impose a ready-made model of federation but to provide Europeans with a constitutional text for discussion and ratification.

The presence of a constitutional text changes everything. No one needs to debate whether “more Europe” or “less Europe” is better. One can ask clear questions: which competences must be European? What can remain national or regional? How will citizens and federated states be represented? How will the executive be elected, controlled, and replaced? What guarantees will be necessary to protect minorities, opposition, judicial independence, journalism, and the environment? How will the Constitution be amended? The democratic process of constitutional change turns political slogans into institutional decisions.

Europe must be constituted by its citizens

A true federation cannot be negotiated by governments and imposed on citizens as a fait accompli. The constitutional right to form a state belongs to the people. Therefore, the European federation must emerge from discussion and voluntary consent.

The Conference on the Future of Europe and the European Citizens’ Panels have shown that multilingual, transnational discussion is feasible.[5] However, it must not be occasional or merely advisory. Citizens must be able not only to offer their suggestions but also to set the agenda, compare constitutional models, question experts and politicians, amend the draft, and see the consequences of their proposals. Civil society organizations, universities, schools, municipalities, trade unions, professional associations, enterprises, and community organizations must conduct such discussions in every member state and in all European languages.

The civic discussion should not be limited to supporters of European integration. It must include skeptics, rural citizens, working people threatened by economic transformation, people of all ages, migrants, minorities, and citizens who fear that centralized institutions may alienate the government from the people. Their views must not be dismissed as ignorance or hostility. They must influence the division of competences and the system of checks.

Recent European Parliament polls indicate not only interest but also potential: 89% of respondents believe EU member states should be more united, while 73% believe the Union needs stronger instruments to address today’s challenges.[6] This does not constitute approval of any constitution, but it shows that citizens recognize the ineffectiveness of fragmentation. The task now is to turn general dissatisfaction into a well-founded decision.

Access to information and education are the democratic infrastructures

Citizen participation in the civic process presupposes access to information that is both comprehensible and trustworthy. Civic education must provide not only knowledge of European institutions but also an understanding of how power operates in Europe: who initiates laws, who adopts them, who implements them, who finances them, and who is responsible for failure.

Such education should foster democratic habits: the willingness to listen before blaming; to distinguish evidence from opinion; to accept disagreement; to respect minorities’ rights; to consider the consequences of decisions; and to understand that electoral success does not confer power. The book “Governing in the Name of the People: Democratic Leadership, Constitutional Authority, and the Discipline of Power” and its Spanish version, “Gobernando en nombre del pueblo: Liderazgo democrático, autoridad constitucional y disciplina del poder,” address these questions.[7,8] Democracy endures not because of institutions alone but because citizens and leaders recognize that government is temporary, limited, and accountable.

The European institutions, national governments, and educational authorities must support independent civic learning, constitutional guidance, civic discussions, multilingual explanations, and a database of trustworthy information. However, education must not become propaganda. It must teach citizens how to analyze arguments, not what to think.

A special appeal to the journalists

We make a special appeal to the journalists of Europe, because no democratic transformation is possible without their contribution.

Journalism is not a passive observer of the democratic process. It is the indispensable infrastructure of self-government. Citizens cannot make sovereign decisions if the information relevant to those decisions is withheld, distorted, depersonalized, or manipulated. Journalists expose abuse, scrutinize claims made by authorities, connect decisions to human consequences, preserve public memory, and provide a forum for alternative opinions.

Journalism does not promote a European federation or any political idea. It is the independent investigation of events; verification of evidence; distinction between reportage and opinion; disclosure of interests and doubts; impartial representation of perspectives; prompt correction of errors; and thorough examination of proponents and opponents of the federation alike. Journalism must identify the policies supported by the best available evidence and discredit those based on lies and prejudice. Yet it must do so not mechanically, but by carefully analyzing the arguments.

Therefore, we invite journalists to shed light on Europe’s constitutional question. Show why decisions are delayed or blocked. Trace responsibility for these decisions across European and national institutions. Compare Europe’s treaty-based system with alternatives to federation. Unmask the beneficiaries and victims of fragmentation. Analyze the European constitutional proposal article by article. Invite proponents and opponents of federation, constitutional lawyers, workers, entrepreneurs, representatives of local communities, youth, and historically disadvantaged groups to participate in the discussion. Most importantly, do not oversimplify this issue by reducing it to questions of personality, electoral games, or the false opposition between a centralized super-state and isolated nation-states.

Journalists need protection to do their jobs. Concentrated media ownership, precarious employment, political pressure, opaque ownership, surveillance, strategic lawsuits, online harassment, disinformation, and violence threaten journalistic independence. The recently adopted European Media Freedom Act, with most of its provisions implemented in August 2025, marks a significant step forward.[9] However, even such statutory protections can be undermined when enforcement depends on the institutions under investigation.

This is why we have proposed the Ombudsman Council, or Quarta Politica, as the fourth branch of government, alongside the legislative, executive, and judicial branches.[10] This council’s role is to defend the integrity of democratic governance from the citizen’s perspective: it should receive complaints, investigate systemic failures and maladministration, protect vulnerable aspects of the democratic process, and require public authorities to adopt the necessary measures to address the deficiencies found. It will not govern, make legislation, or adjudicate in court, but will ensure the accountability of those who govern, make laws, and decide in court.

The Ombudsman Council must establish a specialized chamber to protect journalistic independence, or journalism more broadly.[11] It will provide the institutional conditions for independent journalism. It will investigate political and economic pressure, violations of source confidentiality, discriminatory restrictions on access to information, misuse of surveillance, strategic lawsuits, opaque media ownership, and authorities’ failure to protect journalists. Independence, plural composition, transparency, and a constitutional basis will be essential for the chamber and for the Ombudsman Council as a whole. It must not become a ministry of truth, a licensing authority for approved opinions, or a tool of censorship.

The relationship between journalism and the Ombudsman Council must be complementary. Journalism reveals and publicizes information that institutions try to hide. Quarta Politica gives citizens and journalists the opportunity to investigate systemic failures and to demand action from public authorities. However, journalism remains free to investigate the chamber and the Ombudsman Council.

The democratic choice that cannot be delayed any further

Europe need not choose between ineffective fragmentation and undemocratic centralization. A democratic federation offers a third way: a sufficiently strong government capable of solving common problems, power constitutionally bounded with a robust system of checks and balances, and autonomous federated states and communities.

Therefore, we appeal to the citizens of Europe to read, analyze, discuss, and improve the proposed Constitution; to form civic groups and public forums; to ask political candidates about their positions on the issue; and to insist on a transparent constitutional process and on ratification.

We call on educators, universities, professional organizations, trade unions, civil society organizations, and cultural institutions to develop constitutional literacy in Europe.

We appeal to elected officials and public servants to stop treating institutional reforms as a technical matter for specialists or as a matter of diplomatic negotiations. Constitutional authority derives not only from agreement among the governments but also from the well-informed consent of citizens.

We urge journalists and media companies to provide independent coverage of this choice.

Europe cannot be rejuvenated by publicity, fear, and propaganda. It can be rejuvenated by facts, analysis, public discussion, institutional imagination, and democracy.

Europe’s future must not happen to its citizens. Citizens must shape it. The independent press can help them do so.

References