On Sept. 4th, 2013 the Pirateparty of Luxembourg will host the next conference of European pirate parties to finalize the foundation process.
Warsaw Declaration of the European Pirate Party – Letter of Intent
We, the undersigning European Pirates,
realizing the need for a new political party in Europe,
affirming the declaration of Prague,
affirming the declaration of Paris,
taking into account the negotiations at the Barcelona conference,
taking into account the negotiations at the Manchester conference,
taking into account the negotiations at the Paris conference,
taking into account the negotiations at the Warsaw conference,
noting the results of the meeting in Aarau,
noting the results of the meeting in Potsdam,
noting the results of the meeting in Rome,
noting the results of the meeting in Zagreb,
noting the results of the meeting in Kiev,
noting the results of countless online meetings,
Declare negotiation process for the foundation of the European Pirate Party as complete,
Agree on the overall details of the structure of the statutes for the organization as was decided on the said conferences and meetings,
State our commitment to the Manifesto as agreed upon at the Warsaw conference,
Declare our intent to join the European Pirate Party, with regard to the ratification process that is set by individual Parties,
Agree to convene in Luxembourg to lay the foundation of the European Pirate Party by formally adopting statutes and Manifesto,
Invite other Pirates Parties of Europe to join us in the foundation of the European Pirate Party.
[ https://eu.piratenpad.de/warsaw-2013-manifesto-revised ]
On Sept. 1st / 2nd the Pirates de Catalunya will host the first conference of European pirate parties solely dedicated to the objective of agreeing on draft statutes for the European Pirates, the organization that is to coordinate the policies and electoral campaigns of the pirate movement across Europe.
Over 40 delegates from more than 15 countries all over Europe will attend the conference. It will be of vital importance for the founding of the European Pirate Party early 2013. Core topics include details of structure, membership, and decision making which have been prepared in regular online conferences during the previous months.
The working sessions will take place throughout the weekend on the Citilab premises in Cornellà. Afterwards a series of talks is going to attract public interest in the heart of Barcelona’s centre on Sunday afternoon organized by Pirates de Catalunya:
Birgitta Jónsdóttir: Member of the Icelandic Parliament. Activist and spokesperson for various groups, among them Wikileaks and the International Modern Media Institute. Proponent of the Freedom of Information Act passed in June 2010 and a founding member of the Icelandic Pirate Party. Jónsdóttir will discuss the Icelandic Revolution, the current situation faced by Wikileaks and Julian Assange and what led some of those involved in Iceland’s movement to establish an Icelandic Pirate Party.
Aleks Lessmann: Political director of PP Bavaria and one of the foreign policy leaders of the Pirate Party of Germany, which currently holds 45 state parliament seats and 163 city/municipal council seats, Lessmann will present the German pirates’ vision for Europe. After climbing to 14% in the polls, the Piratenpartei is working towards bringing civic participation to the European elections as well.
Josep Jover: Lawyer and coordinator of the legal group for the 15M movement. He defeated the SGAE (the Spanish MPAA and RIAA) in court, having Spain’s private copying levy declared illegal in October 2010, and had its leadership arrested on corruption charges a year and a half later. He was also the Catalan Pirate candidate in the Spanish general elections. Jover will talk about international cooperation on the European level to protect the rights of citizens of the European Union.
Muriel from pirata.cat / Krishna
The Prague declaration on cooperation between European Pirate Parties provides two concrete goals:
A) to have a common election program included in the individual programs of the respective parties (§ II.)
B) to establish a political party at European level (§ IV.)
Both tasks require a lot of energy, ressources and time, so let’s start now to work on them! For this purpose two seperate mailinglists were created to coordinate the tasks:
In addition regular meetings are held to work on the seperate tasks. The first meetings will be
A) Mai 15th 21:30 CET
B) Mai 17th 20:00 CET
We will meet in Mumble server mumble.piratenpartei-nrw.de (Port 64738) in the channel “International > PPEU”.
In these meetings we will discuss only the respective topics, that means in A) we will not discuss the structure of PPEU f.ex. Also please bear in mind that these first meetings will be mainly about “how” we will work for the next few months and not already about detailled discussions of the topic itself. To avoid repeating arguments and discussing what has already been discussed please refer to http://ppeu.net/ and read through the blogposts in preparation for the meetings.
We will prepare a proposal for an agenda and share it a few days before both meetings so everyone can contribute. Please subscribe yourself to the respective mailinglists to receive these announcements.
We hope a lot of you will participate – only together we can realize our ambitious goals!
So the conference in Prague is over – we got a good conversation about PPEU going, including some criticism that was being voiced.
The big breakthrough we had in Prague was a declaration regarding PPEU. Many Pirates sat together for hours to formulate it and the fact that many Pirates have signed it already shows that we are going into the right direction. The biggest challenge lying ahead is to have this declaration ratified by all European Pirate Parties.
This is a post regarding current discussions among Pirates how PPEU should be organzied. It was written by Mattias Bjärnemalm and is reposted here unchanged except for minor formatting. A cc-by-license applies.
I would like to start by stating that what I write is always my personal opinion and that you can assume the majority of the Swedish Pirates to be both less positive towards and less interested in European cooperation and organization than I am. Sitting in the heart of EU and working in the European parliament gives me a bias towards European unity that by far outweighs the general position among the Swedish population and Swedish pirates. Perhaps that can explain why only two Swedish Pirates (me being one of them) filled in the Survey that was recently presented here. Continue reading »
Continue reading »
Continue reading »
When we established why we want a European Pirate Party, we forgot to mention that in previous discussions some people expressed reservations about a formalized structure of PPEU. The biggest risk of a PPEU without formal structure is that people will work on the same topics without knowing it, thus wasting time and resources instead of focussing them. One solution would be the creation of taskforces – each group taking care of specific tasks (f.ex. campaign organization, press team, helping new parties). A central register of taskforces should be kept to avoid creation of multiple teams working in parallel on same topics. Another option would be that every Pirate Party delegates at least one Pirate to work in a regular EU taskforce that works on the most necessary topics. While this model would ensure participation of all EU/European Pirate Parties, it will take manpower from national parties that might not be able to afford it.
However, we think that a structured PPEU has many advantages (see 2nd blogpost) while not restraining the creation of less formalized structures. Special taskforces should be created, especially for the planning of the EU election campaign – but they can be created within or parallel to the structure of PPEU to ensure the benefits of both models to be realized.
As a structured PPEU/Europe does not prevent the creation and management of special European working groups, we continue to discuss some basic questions regarding its structure and form. We will pose these as a number of questions, and give possible answers. These answers are not the be-all, end-all answers for these questions, rather they are the answers people came up with in this discussion already. We think that most of these are the questions we should try to answer during the PPEU panel in Prague, while others should be tackled during the draft process of the statutes (and the subsequent votes on them during the founding conference).
1. The first question is geographical: What countries do we want to include? Possible answers:
- Only EU countries
- EU countries as full members and Non-EU countries as observers and/or being restricted in participation or voting
- EU-countries and those that are directly bound to the EU by treaties (such as EFTA countries like Switzerland, Norway, and Iceland) as full members, as well as candidate countries (Croatia, Bosnia-Hercegowina, Serbia, …; keep in mind that Turkey is a candidate country, too), and Pirate Parties from other European countries as observers and/or being restricted in participation or voting.
- All European Pirate Parties as full members(Then we need to decide how we define Europe, according to the newest definitions even Kazakhstan and Azerbaidjan have European territory.) This would include the PPs of Belarus, Kazachstan, Russia and Ukraine.
2. The second question is organizational: What kind of membership(s) do we want?
- Option A: Some have proposed that it should be organized like PPI: the same amount of votes for each country (with possible restricted/observer membership for regional parties, and organizations like the Young Pirates, PPI and PWB).
- Restricted membership is what the European Greens have for non-EU parties, it goes somewhat further than observer membership, but is short of full rights. What this exactly would entail would have to be debated during the preparation of the founding conference.
- Option B: Another idea was to organize it grassroot-like, giving each individual Pirate either automatic membership (through their national party) or the option to apply for individual membership. In this alternative each pirate would have a single vote.
There are a number of problems with both systems, A and B:
- Regarding option A, it is pretty far away from the grassroots (in the sense of Basisdemokratie) ideal that many Pirates hold very dear. This is because only Pirate Parties (and not every Pirate) would be members of the organization. The potential problem here is that the individual Pirates are not equal when represented by their party: a vote from Pirate Party Luxembourg theoretically represents less Pirates than one from Pirate Party Sweden and therefore a single Pirate from Luxembourg for example has more representation than a Pirate from Germany or France).
- Apart from the fact option B is very unpractical, there is the danger of the bigger Pirate Parties (like the German one) voting their view as the main view for PPEU, imposing their idea of democracy on the pirates of other countries. This would result in a not very pluralistic organization.
Option C: As a compromise, there was the proposition of having a mix of options A and B
- C1: a bicameral system, with one gremium composed by the individual pirates, and one where each national party (or confederation in the case of Spain) has a vote. In order to pass something it would have to get some kind of majority (50% or upwards was proposed) in both chambers. This could be seen as a pluralistic and democratic approach.
- C2: An organization where the directives that drive the organizational matters are decided by a chamber of representatives from Pirate Parties, while the political agenda is decided by the individual Pirate Parties’ members on a 1 person 1 vote basis (this also give us time to define things better, since the organization will have to be built before having a political roadmap defined)
Both of these would however not solve the problem of practicability. Because of the relative vastness of the European continent, a General Assembly (GA) in Barcelona would bring a lot of Catalan Pirates there, but not many Swedes or Greeks would make the trip. Decentralized GAs and electronic voting have been proposed to solve these issues, but the first one has not been tested, and the second one is not accepted as a good way to make decisive votes by a number of Pirate Parties. Additionally, both electronic voting and (decentralized) GAs would need to take different languages into account to not exclude non-English speaking Pirates.
Option D: Another way would be to use a system with proportional representation, based on the population of national countries (like the EU-Parliament is doing). Alternatively votes could be measured by the votes the national Pirate Parties got at the last elections to the EU Parliament. The more votes a Pirate Party got, the more votes it gets in the PPEU.
- But as not all Pirate Parties even took part in the last elections to the European Parliament and some countries do not have their own Pirate Party yet, this system is not a viable option for the PPEU (yet) (however for example, the European Greens, the PES and the ELDR use this system in a hybrid form together with a minimum of votes for each member party).
For now it seems to us authors of this text that only Option A is workable. Considering that many Pirates expressed a big need and urgency to coordinate the 2014 EP election campaign, this should be our working model.
Akin to how the European Greens do it , individual pirates that are important for the work of PPEU (like Pirate MEPs, the Board, or other individuals deemed important) could become honorary single members, and this could even be opened up to all European-minded Pirates, but with no voting rights attached.
It could be written in the statutes that we aspire to change into something more akin to Options C or D in the long run. However, an alternative idea was to use Pirates Without Borders as the place where internationally minded individual pirates could work together, and that PPEU should focus on campaign work, with an organizational structure like model A.
As noted above, whom to include for observer membership is also an issue. Regional parties like Catalonia, regional subdivisions like the German Bundesländ Pirate Parties, supranational organizations like PPI and Pirates Without Borders, the national Young Pirates and their possible international umbrella organization, and countries in neighbouring regions such as Northern Africa are all possible observer members that need to be discussed.
As you can see, there is still a lot to debate and decide and perhaps you have a recommendation on the issue of membership that has not been thought of yet. Even if you cannot join us in Prague, there are always the possibilities to either take part online or tell us your recommendation in advance, so that we might put it on the table for you. The more people contribute to this process the better it will turn out, we’re sure. Therefore, join us, join the Pirate swarm!
Justus Römeth (@DarthSquig)
Martina P. (@LunaLoof)
Benjamin Siggel (@crackpille)
Jerry Weyer (@jerryweyer)
Jens Seipenbusch (@seipenbusch)
Steffen Ortmann (@ortsman)