The Limits of Democratic Representation? Contrasting visions of democracy and the rule of law between National and European Parliaments

National Parliaments play an important role in defending democracy. Notwithstanding their strengthened role following the Lisbon Treaty, multiple and continuous crises in Europe have significantly tested their scope of action posing questions of accountability and legitimacy as further constraints have been placed on their ability to exercise effective democratic representation. The paper intends to bridge the gap in the literature on democracy and the rule of law drawing on post-functionalist theory to examine the salience of these terms as these pertain to debates taking place in national parliaments (NPs) and European Parliaments (EPs), looking at the cases of Greece, Germany, and Poland. What is the salience of these terms and to what extend do NPs and EPs attach importance or draw attention to them as political issues? Is the salience of these topics the same in both contexts, and what explains the differences, if any? The paper argues that dissensus between political actors, primarily viewed in the context of government vs. opposition parties, tends to increase the salience of democracy and the rule of law, as two key concepts that have been affected the most by subsequent crises in the EU. Drawing on Eurobarometer data, the paper gauges European citizens perceptions on the importance of democracy and the rule of law. The paper also applies quantitative text analysis to gauge the occurrence and frequency of the terms democracy and rule of law in parliamentary debates to explain their status in both contexts. This paper draws on an original RED-SPINEL data set focused on national parliaments.