I strongly disagree that there's a "democratic deficit". 1. The EU court of justice's judges are appointed by the national governments (one judge per country).

I strongly disagree that there's a "democratic deficit". 1. The EU court of justice's judges are appointed by the national governments (one judge per country). Each country has its say on who the court's judges are. 2. The EU court of justice's rulings are about EU law, but EU law is not national law. The highest court remains the national court, although typically national courts defer to the judgement of the EU court. 3. The EU court of justice only rules on EU directives, which are international treaties. In that sense it's similar to WTO rulings, except broader in scope. 4. The EU directives that it rules on are approved by the EU parliament, a body that is directly elected by EU citizens. 5. Directives themselves are not laws but treaties, they have to be turned into law by the national governments. While the EU can impose fines for not doing this in a timely matter, national governments can just choose to leave the EU treaty if they don't like it (participation in the EU is always voluntary). Where in that whole chain of events is there supposed to be this "democratic deficit"?