Abstract
The subject of the article is the issue of using the institutions of direct democracy in the process of shaping the directions of a very specific element of foreign policy – relations with the European Union, of which San Marino is not a member. While most of the referenda related to the European Union concern the accession of countries to this organization, the vote in 2013 was of a slightly different nature. Therefore, the author attempts to indicate how the use of the instruments of direct democracy by citizens, in a way in opposition to the institution of indirect democracy (parliament and its dependent government), can contribute to the decision-makers making political decisions desired by citizens, even in seemingly rather unusual (apart from the aforementioned accession referenda) for direct democracy, spheres as the directions of foreign policy.
Highlights
Analyzing the behavior of political decision-makers in the Republic, the relatively slow, but at the same time quite clearly maintained course of political actions, the aim of which was to bring closer to the EU structures, is striking
This course has not been abandoned to a large extent by any subsequent government, despite the fact that the Sammarinese party system is characterized by quite high instability,20 and even within the government itself was often possible to see mutually contradictory views, which was perfectly illustrated by the recommendations of coalition political parties regarding the 2013 vote
The referendum limited the formula of a wide range of scenarios for the development of relations with the Union (‘from a slight approximation to membership inclusive’) to rapprochement in the form of the conclusion of an association agreement with the Union
Summary
The Sammarinese were to answer the question whether they agreed to the parliament giving a negotiating mandate to the government “in order to initiate the formalities necessary for the implementation of the Memorandum of Understanding with the European Union, including the membership of the Republic of San Marino in the Union after the approval referendum?” In the end, the vote did not take place due to the decision of the Judicial Council (Collegio Giudicante) (Decreto, 2003). What is worth emphasizing, the question that was put to the vote was long and repeatedly submitted, which could be perceived by citizens as confusing, and this in turn could cause doubts as to what de facto means voting “for” and “against,” i.e. whether it means only a form of support for the government’s actions for the process of integration of the Republic with the European Union, is a kind of quasi-accession referendum or merely a form of expression of support for the deepening of EU-San Marino relations.. According to the law of the time, a vote could be valid if the voters in favor of the referendum motion (apart from obtaining a majority) were at least 32% of all those entitled to vote, while the number of people voting ‘for’ in the referendum in question was only slightly over 20%
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
