A European Citizen’s Initiative for a European Charter of the Commons was initiated by the municipality of Naples, with the the first high level technical meeting of jurists taking place recently (in December) at the International University College of Turin.

Introduction:

“The dichotomy of private property and the state, on which the current constitutional tradition is grounded, has proven itself incapable of resisting the distortions produced by more than 20 years of neoliberal order. The outcome has been a global and severe constitutional imbalance, favoring the private sector and specifically corporate interests at the expense of the people.

Massive transfers of common resources from the public to the private sphere are occurring throughout the world, with total disregard of any constitutional guarantees of the public interest, due process, and just compensation. Our democracies are increasingly being jeopardized by collusive state and market actors; government representatives that put the short term profits of individuals and corporations ahead of the interests of the common people.

From Greece to Spain, from Tunisia to Egypt, from Italy to Bolivia, Ecuador, rural India and China, the people are increasingly aware of the need for a different model of globalization. These activists are currently engaged in acts of reclaiming commons all around the world. From those resisting the privatization of resources (for example in Italy with the water referendum) to the recent occupations of public spaces against neoliberalism ( for example the Indignados in Spain and the people of Greece). In solidarity with these movements, we initiate a campaign for the European Charter of the Commons.

The International University College and its Institute for the Study of Political Economy and Law together with the Municipality of Naples, the Institut international D’etudes et recherches sur les biens communs, and European Alternatives are launching under the Lisbon Treaty Regulation No. 211/2011, a European Citizen Initiative for the European Charter of the Commons, pursuing the legal status and protection of the commons within the European Union.

We define the Commons as two part; it is both about reclaiming access to fundamental resources as well as the very democratic process that governs their distribution Resources that are fundamental to human life include both natural commons like water, food, energy and the atmosphere, as well as man made commons, like technology, medicine, the internet and culture. Reclaiming the commons also requires a reshaping of the democratic process as it stands today, offering an alternative to the model that has prevailed under state and market models. Governing the commons demands a shift of power from the centralized state and free market to local communities, placing the power to satisfy the long term needs of these communities as well as those of future generations, back into the hands of community member through bottom up, local and direct democracy.”

Here is the text of a draft version of an European Charter, created early December and that will be discussed in upcoming workshops.

Report of the First Workshop:

“On the 2nd and 3rd of December, 2011, the International University College of Turin hosted (along with the Department of Economics “S. Cognetti de Martiis” of the University of Turin) an International workshop on a Draft European Charter of the Commons. The workshop brought together economists, philosophers, social theorists, lawyers and activists to discuss the proposal for a European Charter of the Commons to be presented to the EU Commission as a European Citizens’ Initiative (for those that are unfamiliar with ECIs, these are proposals which EU citizens may present to the Commission, requesting the latter to propose a given legal act that is deemed necessary for the implementation of the European Treaties).

I am not going to give a detailed account here of the myriad discussions that took place in that context, also in order not to jump start the activist networks and the promoters that are behind this initiative. Instead, I am going to use this as an opportunity to elucidate the idea of “cultural performance”, the brainchild of American sociologist Jeffrey Alexander, which I believe allows one (particularly those that took part to the workshop) to make sense of why certain discussions took place, and why they were properly relevant to the task of drafting a European Charter of the Commons.

For Alexander, the increasing complexity of modern societies makes it harder to stage “social performances“ (i.e. instances of cultural communication) that command the same allegiance and respect as rituals did in simpler societies. This is because many of the elements of a social performance (like the background representations upon which the performance builds, actors, means of symbolic production, mise-en-scène and audiences) have become increasingly de-fused, i.e. they are further and further apart and more fragmented, making it harder to achieve the compelling, moving character of ritual.

In light of this, it is crucial, for a social performance to be successful, that it be capable of bringing together once again all such elements in a seamless fashion, allowing a “flow” of meaning that project the background representations, through the actors and the mise-en-scène of their performance, to the intended audience. When this happens, “[t]he mere action of performing accomplishes the performance’s intended effect”.

So, for example, one of the problems faced by a Draft European Charter of the Commons is to be able to “speak” to its intended audience, which – however – is fragmented, including on the one hand the EC Commission (and its focus on Treaty implementation, implying allegiance to the free-market ideology broadly embedded in the Treaties) and, on the other, “the commoners of Europe” which – despite not being a uniform group themselves – seem however to be quite distant from the positions that the Commission is institutionally bound to take. Is it even possible to stage a “performance” that be able to speak to both? And how to stage a performance that, purely by being staged, achieve its intended effect of projecting given representations about the “commons” (in the broadest possible sense) onto the desired audience?

These questions show how the choices to be faced here were not easy, confronting participants with the dilemma of drafting a narrow proposal that appealed to the Commission but would not be recognisable by commoners as their charter, or retain boldness and “authenticity” and speak to the commoners and for the commoners. This choice, it seems to me, appeared to be inevitable in the light of the basic (and deep) fragmentation of the dual audience to which the Charter is directed (EC Commission on the one hand, European commoners on the other). Eventually, a consensus seems to have emerged for a bold project that be true to the “constitutional” aspiration that underpins it, even at the risk of facing rejection by the Commission. As a consequence, I believe, the Charter of the Commons, as a performance, will speak differently to the two audiences.

On the one hand, as far as the EU Commission is concerned, if the proposal were to retain its boldness it would not so much attempt to engage the latter in a debate on the commons – given the excessive distance in the respective positions – but rather to challenge the Commissions’ institutional role as the holder of a monopoly over legislative initiative within the European Union (perhaps as a choice, embedded in the Treaties by heads of state, to prevent initiatives “from below” that would otherwise bypass them).

On the other hand, the “performance” that the Charter ought to deliver to the European Commoners will, instead, retain broadness and diversity in a manner that speaks for the commons, understood as anything that can be managed in a participatory manner by a community, according to principles of “care, reproduction and sustainability” [2]. Most importantly, the drafting and submission of the Charter ought to enact an instance of “commoning”, bringing disparate audiences (e.g. from environmentalists to free software activists) together around a common project. The possibility to make the European Charter of the Commons an occasion for the Commoners of Europe to band together, retaining consistency – in their action – to their stated intentions, seems to me to be the most promising side of the whole project. If, in fact, the European Charter of the Commons will be able to enact an instance of commoning in putting forth a legal stance for the commons, it will indeed have achieved the point where “[t]he mere action of performing accomplishes the performance’s intended effect”.”