Civility in Parliamentary Ethics: A Comparative Approach Between the EU and the US

Parliamentary civility—defined as the adherence to assembly’s procedures and respectful discourse, collegial behavior among elected representatives—serves as a cornerstone of democratic legitimacy and institutional functioning. This research analyzes how the European Parliament and the U.S. Congress have conceptualized, codified, and enforced standards of civility, within their respective parliamentary ethics codes. The comparative analysis will explore several dimensions of parliamentary ethics: philosophical and historical evolution of civility standards in a transatlantic perspective, formal rule structures, enforcement mechanisms, the role of presiding officers, sanctions for violations, and the impact of media and polarization over civil or uncivil conducts. The contribution will first analyze the philosophical and historical roots of each tradition of civility in the U.S. and the EU – the justification for parliamentary civility in parliament and how it has evolved over time. It will reveal significant institutional differences stemming from distinct constitutional frameworks and political cultures. The European Parliament operates within a multilingual, multinational context that necessitates formalized rules of procedure emphasizing consensus-building and respect for cultural diversity. Its Code of Conduct focuses on conflicts of interest, lobbying transparency, and dignified behavior, with enforcement mechanisms including the Advisory Committee on the Conduct of Members and the new inter-institutional ethics committee. In contrast, the U.S. House and Senate maintain separate ethics committees and rely heavily on informal norms and parliamentary procedure to regulate debate decorum. Key findings indicate that if both systems value civility as essential to legislative function, they differ in enforcement, cultural expectations, and degrees of formalization of conduct standards. While institutional design shapes civility enforcement, broader political culture and polarization levels also significantly influence actual adherence to civility norms. This research contributes to understanding how democratic institutions and representatives balance non-imperative mandate, free speech, with the need for respectful parliamentary conduct and debate, offering insights on the varieties of parliamentary civility.