Will the EU ever ratify the Council of Europe’s Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence? The European Parliament supports it despite opposition
By: Valentine Berthet (she/her/hers)
Many observers from EU institutions, academia, non-governmental and grassroot organizations are left wondering whether the EU will ever ratify the Council of Europe’s Istanbul Convention on violence against women, known as the Istanbul Convention. While talks remain stalled in the European Council, within which a common accord is yet to be reached amongst heads of member states, the European Parliament (EP) has defended the Convention’s ratification since 2014 despite a growing opposition. This research article aims to uncover the discursive mechanisms of support and opposition that EU citizens’ representatives use to either uphold or contest gender equality norms. Drawing on a significantly large number of interviews with parliamentary actors and plenary debates, this article analyzes the nuances in the discourses of both ‘norm promoters’ and ‘norm anti-preneur’ and pays attention to the differences and similarities between and within the EP’s political groups.
Theoretically, the discourses are analyzed via a framework developed in the International Relations feminist scholarship in which norms (i.e., combating violence against women) are conceptualized as flexible. This means that the norms’ content (i.e., the definition of what constitutes violence against women) and environment (i.e., the existence of other competitive norms, such as States’ interference in private matters) are constantly renegotiated. Importantly, the framework also pays attention to the actors behind the discourses and distinguish between norm promoters (i.e., supporters) and norm antipreneurs (i.e., opponents). This framework is especially useful to the analysis of discourses about EU’s ratification of the Istanbul Convention in the EP because it highlights the dynamics and interconnections between support and opposition, and the different political groups to which ‘norm promoters’ and ‘norm anti-preneurs’ belong. Thus, it draws connections between political groups, but also highlight the internal contestations that emerge in groups on an important piece of legislation about the gender equality norm.
Key discourses of support to and opposition to EU’s ratification of the Istanbul Convention in the European Parliament.
Four key discourses were identified and organized into two clusters of norm promoters vs. norm antipreneurs (see table). The first cluster articulates support via a symbolic frame in which ratification is pursued as an ideal goal. Here, EU’s competences are downplayed, and the effect of ratification amplified. The cluster also includes a procedural frame in which the exact scope of ratification is assessed against EU’s competences. Here, while ratification is perceived as important, its narrow scope is nonetheless acknowledged. The second cluster articulates opposition via an illegitimate and redundant frame, in which EU’s ratification is not necessary because national laws are already adequate. Finally, this cluster contains an outright form of rejection to the Convention, not only its ratification by the EU. Here, the Convention is designated as a dangerous, controversial text.
The EU’s accession to the Istanbul Convention was first seen as an easy file in the EP in 2014 but opposition gained strength and visibility in 2016, when new radical right populist MEPs joined after the elections. The EP consistently supported the ratification via numerous non-binding resolutions, but opposition in the Hemicycle is both complex and strident. Analyzing this discursive opposition matters because it provides explanations to current disagreements in the European Council. Discords amongst heads of member states must be taken seriously since the withdrawal of an EU member states from the Convention would significantly jeopardize the EU bloc’s chances of ratification. As of now, all EU member states have signed the Convention and the EU itself, as an independent legal body, signed in June 2017. Nonetheless, considering the contestations in several member states, the scenario of one EU member state withdrawing from the Convention should not be underestimated. While Turkey has already made the decision to withdraw from the Convention on the 1st of July 2021, despite being the first country to ratify it, averse EU member states have so far only wielded the threat of withdrawal. For instance, Poland has officially announced its wish to withdraw in June 2020.
While reaching a common accord on EU’s ratification of the Istanbul Convention remains pending and unlikely in the European Council, recent developments have come from the European Court of Justice and the European Commission. The European Court of Justice declared in its Opinion 1/19 of October 2021 that the European Council can wait until a common accord is reached between all member states before enacting its conclusions on ratification, but that ratification cannot depend on such agreement. Therefore, the Court’s decision suggests that the European Council’s choice to put ratification on hold until a common accord is reached constitutes a political decision, and not a legal one required by the Treaties. Further, the European Commission declared in its Gender Equality Strategy (2020-2025) that new EU legislative measures will be pursued to achieve the Convention’s objectives, within the limits of EU competences, if talks on ratification remain stalled.
Despite these declarations, this research article shows that gender equality norms are still contested even in the most gender-equality friendly of the EU institutions, the European Parliament. Some key take-away messages are that opposition to gender equality in the EP should not be underestimated and building consensus around gender-based violence policies can be difficult, even within political groups on the center-left. As expected, contestations arise most amongst the political groups on the radical right, with many framing their opposition to gender equality norms with Eurosceptic arguments. So far, the opposition was not successful in stopping the adoption of resolutions in favor of ratification. However, resolutions are non-binding and attract little legislative interest within the Parliament. Therefore, one can legitimately wonder whether this opposition will gather more strength and influence in the event where the EP would be asked to vote on a legislative decision for ratification (or on a new directive), which would certainly attract more interest.
Read the full article here: Norm under fire: support for and opposition to the European Union’s ratification of the Istanbul Convention in the European Parliament
Each blog post gives the views of the individual author(s) based on their published IFJP article. All posts published on ifjpglobal.org remain the intellectual property and copyright of the author or authors.
Valentine Berthet is a PhD student in social sciences at Tampere University, Finland. Berthet is a member of the ERC-funded project EUGENDEM that analyzes the gendered policies and practices of the European Parliament’s political groups. She has a background in International Law studies and has published academic articles in Social Politics and in the Journal for Common Market Studies.