EU institutions

The European Union (EU) has closely correlated different aspects of the peace process in Bosnia with progress towards European accession. The ‘power of attraction’ of EU membership would presumably induce the Bosnian authorities to accept the adaptation costs of political and economic transformation. However, the Europeanisation approach has not produced the expected results. The track record of the EU’s policies towards Bosnia represents a paradigmatic case of what would happen if almost nothing works as efficiently as in the case of the countries that joined the EU in 2004 and 2007. The article investigates the causes of EU policy failure in Bosnia and claims that the EU has not effectively responded to three challenges: 1) adjust the process to the needs of an ethnically divided post-war state; 2) preserve the credibility of accession conditionality, and 3) convey the proper messages on how to comply with EU rules. Therefore, the article argues for a more cohesive and consistent EU approach towards Bosnia.

Alle Rechte vorbehalten. Abdruck oder vergleichbare Verwendung von Arbeiten der Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik ist auch in Auszügen nur mit vorheriger schriftlicher Genehmigung gestattet. SWP-Studien unterliegen einem Begutachtungsverfahren durch Fachkolleginnen und-kollegen und durch die Institutsleitung (peer review). Sie geben die Auffassung der Autoren und Autorinnen wieder.

The aim of his paper is twofold. First, it will display an ever-increasing phenomenon of Member States’ infringements of EU migration and asylum law as an instance of the violation of the principle of solidarity and discuss the reasons behind it. It will be suggested that EU inter-state solidarity is just as much about respecting EU law, as it is about helping each other, as the latter cannot subsist without the former. Second, the paper will consider whether the existing mechanisms of reducing the number of violations are sufficient and discuss the new mechanisms that are being developed – particularly the rule of law conditionality and other conditionality instruments. When addressing the reasons behind the frequent violations, the text will identify two groups of reasons, the first group being applicable to the whole of EU law, and the second one specifically to EU migration and asylum law. In this context, Member States’ violations will be construed as the process of political withdrawal or retrenchment from certain parts of the commonly adopted EU migration and asylum law. This will be explained by relying on the notion of “spillback”or disintegration (as opposed to further European integration based on the neofunctionalist concept of “spillover” effect into more policy areas) and on the concepts of “exit” and “voice” conceived by Albert Hirschman and developed further by Joseph Weiler in his seminal work “The Transformation of Europe”.

The aim of this article is to understand why the EU opted to conclude the ‘EU–Turkey refugee deal’ in March 2016 in the context of the Syrian refugee crisis, despite the fact that the agreement deeply contradicts fundamental EU values and norms. The article seeks to explain the outcome—the conclusion of the EU–Turkey refugee deal—by analysing not only the ability of EU institutions to shape decisions, but also their motivations, ideas and preferences in justifying the EU’s actions in responding to the refugee challenge. It is argued that the deal results from ideational and power struggles between supranational (the European Parliament and the European Commission) and intergovernmental institutions (the European Council and the Council of the European Union). It is demonstrated that while the former put forward normative arguments, the latter invoked security as a main concern to avoid internal divisions between Member States. This article also reveals that such ideational and power struggles have consequences for the EU’s identity. Theoretically, the article builds on the new intergovernmentalist claims and on the normative/ civilian power literature. Empirically, it explores the usage of normative justifications by EU institutions and points to inter-institutional tensions in framing the EU’s response to the refugee challenge.

ABSTRACT

Why do international institutions promote emotional norms? In order to answer this question, the article, first, maps the legitimizing arguments put forward by the Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) in promoting an emotionally loaded norm vis-à-vis Turkey, i.e., the recognition of the Armenian genocide. Second, the paper explores the reasons behind the promotion of this emotional norm by the European Parliament (EP) as justified by the MEPs. The article theoretically draws on the IR literature on emotions, and empirically, it relies on the data generated from the interventions by the MEPs at the plenary on the centenary of the Armenian genocide on 15 April 2015. Through claims analysis, it is demonstrated that the condemnation of genocide is a shared norm within the EP, which transcends national and ideological differences. Consequently, the MEPs aspire to render it an essential constitutive element of the emotional community at the EU level.

Сегодня Европейский союз находится в состоянии системного кризиса, спровоцированного внешними шоками. Это стало возможным потому, что за последние 10 лет институционально-политическая система ЕС заметно деградировала. В статье идентифицированы ключевые негативные тенденции развития институционально-политической системы Евросоюза, имевшие место в прошедшее десятилетие. Представлен также ряд сценариев трансформации ЕС, дана оценка вероятности этих сценариев и связанных с ними рисков и возможностей. Сделан вывод, что наиболее вероятным является ускоренное развитие в Европейском союзе элементов гибкой интеграции, скорее всего в варианте развития системы “ядра и периферии”.

Today, the European Union is in a systemic crisis. The main challenges are well known: Euro crisis underlined by insufficient competitiveness of the EU economy; migration crisis, which is feeding Euroscepticism and ultra-right radicalism; Brexit referendum that highlighted all the defects of the EU political system, primarily those related to the ideology of integration and identity issues. These external shocks have provoked a systemic crisis because, over the last ten years, the institutional and political system of the EU has considerably degraded. This article attempts to identify key negative trends in the development of this system which took place in the past decade: 1) the erosion of solidarity and the collapse of the “inevitable” integration ideology; 2) an increasing heterogeneity within the EU as a result of enlargement that limited potential of Europeanization; 3) reinforcement of the intergovernmental method of governance to the prejudice of a communitarian one; 4) an increasing gap between the image of the EU as an “omnipotent bureaucracy”, the scope of tasks, and modest resources; 5) growing legitimacy deficit and 6) the problem of leadership. On this basis, the paper provides a critical analysis of possible transformation scenarios for the institutional and political system of the European Union, an assessment of their probability, ensuing risks and opportunities. The paper concludes that the most possible option is a further development of various elements of flexible integration, which would transform the EU into a “core and periphery” system. Flexibility would allow combining the federalization of the EU core, and the current (or even lower) level of integration for those countries who do not want or cannot take new obligations.

The establishment of delegated acts should have brought forward significant innovations. In principle, under art.290 TFEU, the Commission now has the monopoly of delegated powers, which ought to be distinguished from implementing powers; the co-legislators should control the delegation on an equal basis, and the comitology procedures should be formally demised. The article seeks to demonstrate that, in practice, these major reforms have been eluded. Instead, a shift in the horizontal and vertical balance of delegated powers has occurred, in favour of the Council and of the Member States respectively. This has, in turn, limited the possible constitutional added value of the Treaty reform, in particular in relation to the principle of separation of powers. In conclusion, the article argues that, in view of the politicisation of the Commission, it will be for the Parliament and the ECJ to reverse the current trend and fully realise the untapped potential of art.290 TFEU.

The book aims to provide a comprehensive overview of EU decentralised agencies as a coherent form of institutional actor, to define their role in the EU executive sphere and to highlight the “dynamic unbalances” underpinning the EU agencification process.
The book explores the major challenges related to this process and the main “constitutional divides” which will shape the future of EU agencies system. First, it provides an in-depth analysis of the distinguish features of EU agencies’ model and examines their legality with regard to the Treaties and the general principles of EU law. Second, the book considers the rationale and governance of EU agencies, in the light of the balance between Member States representation and agencies’ institutional and functional autonomy. Third, the book investigates the powers conferred to EU agencies, the forms of judicial, administrative, financial and political control on their exercise and the functional, procedural and democratic factors of agencies’ legitimacy.
The book underlines the contribution of EU agencies to the European integration process, thanks to their hybrid nature and to the “intergovernmental philosophy” which inspires their governance and decision-making. At the same time, however, the book emphasizes the risks posed by the dynamic and atypical character of the agencification process to the coherence and “constitutional credentials” of the EU legal order. The conclusions therefore call for the establishment of a common constitutional framework for conferring executive powers to agencies, delimiting the material scope of such a conferral and defining an adequate system of control and accountability, comparable to the one applicable to the Commission.

Настоящая работа предлагает комплексную систематизацию существующих в Европейском союзе методов управления. Предложенная концепция, опирающаяся на шесть ключевых положений, отражает существующую в ЕС зависимость между уровнями принятия решения и методами управления. Выявлена взаимосвязь между практикующимися в Евросоюзе методами управления и реализуемыми политиками. Данная теоретическая концепция может быть использована в качестве методологической основы для исследования деятельности ЕС в отдельных сферах политики, процессов принятия решений, эволюции регулирования избранных направлений.

Most of existing researches on methods of governance in the European Union (EU) are rather narrow in scope. Many of them investigate particular policies of the EU, for the purpose of identifying and describing the details of the governance mode in use. Many researches provide a comparative analysis of the application of a particular method of governance in several EU policies. However, there is a clear lacuna in the field of systematization of all methods of governance usable in the EU. This article offers a comprehensive system of EU methods of governance, based on six key principles: 1) EU methods of governance are not reducible to combinations of communitarian and intergovernmental approaches. 2) Methods of governance are linked with the level of decision-making (supersystem, system and subsystem decisions). 3) There are seven basic methods of governance in the EU. Classic intergovernmental method is used to make “historic” decisions at the supersystem level. Communitarian approach and intensive transgovernmentalism are the most common methods at the system level. One can distinguish four methods of governance at the subsystem level: regulation, distribution, policy coordination and executive method. 4) There is no univocal correspondence between methods of policy setting (system level) and policy implementation (subsystem level). 5) Identified methods of governance are the ideal types. In practice, implementation of particular policy in the EU is usually a combination of various governance methods. 6) Methods of governance used at the level of policy implementation could change in the course of time. The concept proposed reflects the intercoupling between the level of decision-making and a method of governance in the EU. It offers a consistent systematization of EU methods of governance, and discloses the correspondence between methods of governance and EU policies. Developed theoretical concept can be used as a methodological basis for the research of EU activities in particular policy areas, of decisionmaking process in the EU, of the evolution of governance in particular policy areas

In her chapter, Ramona Coman scrutinizes the most recent evolutions of EU’s modes of governance since the entry into force of the Maastricht Treaty. The focus of her study lies on the examination of the resilience of EU’s modes of governance in the light of new conceptualizations in EU studies: the new intergovernmentalism and the new supranationalism. While the first sections looks at the intergovernmental method, the second section deals with the community method and the last one with the open method of coordination (OMC) and the European Semester, which is the instrument designed at the onset of the Eurozone crisis for the coordination of macro-economic policies. The contribution shows that EU policy-making witnessed several transformations since the 1990s and that the intensity of change has been fuelled by the Eurozone crisis, which put the decision-making process under considerable strain. In 2010, when it was unclear how to respond appropriately to the problems of the Eurozone both in terms of process and in terms of solutions, Coman argues, EU institutional actors reacted rapidly to reassure the markets and to save the euro. The decisions taken from 2010 to 2012 altered prevailing modes of governance as the crisis forced the EU to adjust the decision-making process. At the onset of the Eurozone crisis the intergovernmental methods prevailed; as soon as the crisis entered in its “slow-burning phase,” supranational institutions and actors regained power and visibility in the decision-making process. The overarching aim of Coman’s contribution is to capture incremental changes in the power relations between the European Commission, the European Parliament, the Council and the European Council and to show how they have remodelled pre-existing modes of governance. The chapter illustrates the “adaptability and resilience” of the EU policy-making in face of new challenges (cf. Pollack, Wallace and Young 2010: 482; Schmidt and Thatcher 2013), that is the ability of EU institutions to adapt to incremental change and sudden disruptions. In doing so, it scrutinizes institutional empowerment in EU decision-making both de iure and de facto. On the one hand, EU institutional actors are granted new attributions in the formulation, decision-making and implementation of EU public policies and, on the other, they perform new functions through their dynamic interactions.

This article comments on recent developments related to the establishment and empowerment of EU agencies. These developments raise questions about which legal basis in the Treaties may be used for such purposes and about the limits that the EU legislator should respect when empowering an agency. In the absence of a clear provision in the Treaties, legal scholarship relied on the Meroni and Romano rulings of the Court of Justice, which predate modern agencification, to clarify these issues. In Short-selling , the Court has now scrutinised agency empowerment for the very first time, even if the Court’s ruling is more of an excessive simplification exercise rather than a clarification exercise. The result of this ruling is that there seem to be few genuine limits imposed on the EU legislator when it contemplates the establishment and empowerment of an agency. The repercussions of this approach for the Single Resolution Mechanism of the Banking Union, in which the establishment of an agency is also envisaged, are also discussed.

This thesis examines the influence of the governments of the Member States of the European Union (EU) on the decisions of the European Court of Justice (ECJ).
Part One develops an analytical framework inspired by  Giddens' structuration theory, which offers both a general understanding of the ECJ decision-making process, and helps assess governments' influence in and on that process. It identifies and exposes the evolving internal (i.e. organisational, procedural, substantive and normative) and external (i.e. legal, political, economical and social) structures which impact on judicial decisions at EU level, and agents that take part in and shape this process (i.e. ECJ judges, Advocate General and staff, EC institutions, national judges, individuals, companies, interest groups, academics, journalists, national MPs, actors of the civil society, etc.), so as to provide an understanding of how varying actors-structures combinations may open or close governmental opportunities for influence in and on the ECJ decision-making process.
In Part Two, it engages in an examination of the various means by which national governments participate in that process, by acting either outside the Court, collectively (i.e. control over the Court’s procedures, powers and jurisdictions, over the legal framework, over the political process, etc.) or individually (i.e. criticism of the ECJ, political appointments or non-compliance), or inside the Court, especially by taking part in preliminary reference proceedings. This analysis leads to conclusions on national governments’ capacity to influence Community case law and on the desirability of such influence, within the context of democratic and pluralist decision-making and law-making at EU level.

This broad-ranging text examines the political dynamic of the European Parliament (EP), showing how the EP is a key component of the political system of the EU. It looks at how, and how effectively, the parliament translates citizen demands into policies, and, in so doing, contributes to wider debates around democracy and legitimacy in the EU.

This article describes the main current globalization trends and provides with the analysis of what impact globalization has on European integration and identity. The author considers the roots as well as levels of identity crisis in
the European union. Special attention is given to the single European demos: key factors of the development and the role of globalization.

В статье анализируются реформы, предусмотренные Лиссабонским договором (ЛД). Анализ положений ЛД проводится в сравнении с Конституцией ЕС 2004 г. и действующими учредительными договорами. Автор приходит к выводу о том, что провал Конституции и сложности при разработке и ратификации ЛД свидетельствуют о вступлении Евросоюза в период стагнации. Эффективность функционирования ЕС на основе ЛД в определенной степени увеличится. Однако в ЕС так и не решена проблема дефицита легитимности и имеет место эрозия солидарности.
This essay is focused on the analysis of reforms specified in the Treaty of Lisbon. The analysis is provided in comparison with the EU Constitution of 2004 and acting foundation agreements. The author concludes that the rejection of the European Constitution and complexity of preparation ami ratification of the Lisbon Treaty shows that the EU has entered the stage of stagnation. Effective function of EU based on the Treaty of Lisbon will rise to some extent. However the problem of deficit of legitimacy has not been resolved yet and the erosion of solidarity exist.

further powers to the EU Yannis Sygkelos statutory lawstatutes Fixed-term Parliaments Act, 2011-text s.1 Polling days for parliamentary general elections (3)The polling day for each subsequent parliamentary general election is to be the first Thursday in May in the fifth calendar year following that in which the polling day for the previous parliamentary general election fell. s.2 Early parliamentary general elections (1)An early parliamentary general election is to take place if-(a)the House of Commons passes a motion in the form set out in subsection (2), and (b)if the motion is passed on a division, the number of members who vote in favour of the motion is a number equal to or greater than two thirds of the number of seats in the House (including vacant seats). (2)The form of motion for the purposes of subsection (1)(a) is-"That there shall be an early parliamentary general election." (3)An early parliamentary general election is also to take place if-(a)the House of Commons passes a motion in the form set out in subsection (4) … (4)The form of motion for the purposes of subsection (3)(a) is-"That this House has no confidence in Her Majesty's Government." Yannis Sygkelos constitutional statutes • do not add up to an already existing constitution, but deal with specific issues that the government of the day raised in each case • are distinguished from ordinary statutes, so long as are not overridden by earlier statutes [the implied repeal rule], unless an express language requires so (Thoburn v Sunderland City Council, 2002) Yannis Sygkelos common law-case Entick v Carrington and others, 1765 'John Entick, declared that the defendants Nathan Carrington and three others, messengers in ordinary to the King [investigating officers], on 11 Nov 1762, at Westminster, in Middlesex, with force and arms broke and entered his dwelling-house in the parish of St Dunstan, Stepney, continued there four hours without his consent and against his will, all that time disturbed him in the peaceable possession thereof, broke open the doors to the rooms, and the locks, iron bars, etc, thereto affixed, broke open the boxes, chests, drawers, etc, of the plaintiff in his house, broke the locks thereto affixed, searched and examined all the rooms in his dwelling house and all the boxes, etc, so broken open; read over, pried into, and examined all the private papers, books, etc, of the plaintiff there found, whereby the secret affairs, etc, of the plaintiff became wrongfully discovered and made public, and took and carried away 100 printed charts, 100 printed pamphlets, etc, of the plaintiff there found, to the

[EN] The nature of the European Union has always been a topic for much discussion and debate, especially between those who advocate its place in international or constitutional law. We always try to define one entity by comparing it to another, so the difficulty of defining lies in finding if that entity can be assimilated with a preexisting one or if it is, more or less, original or, how jurists prefer, " sui generis ". Albeit the European Union has its own " Sonderweg " , we cannot ignore the resemblances it has with national constitutional law. Through this article, we do not wish to support the idea that the European Union will transform into a Super state or Federation, but focus on the present situation of this dynamic organization by highlighting some, although not all, of the similarities between the law established by the Treaties and national constitutional law, and emphasizing some of its flaws.

[RO] Natura Uniunii Europene a fost întotdeauna un subiect de multe discuţii şi dezbateri, mai ales între cei care susţin locul său în dreptul internaţional sau constituţional. Noi încercăm întotdeauna să definim o entitate prin compararea sa cu alta, astfel încât dificultatea de a o defini, constă în a găsi cazul în care entitatea poate fi asimilată cu una preexistentă sau dacă este, mai mult sau mai puţin, originală sau, cum preferă juriştii să fie numită, " sui generis ". Deşi

The adoption of an Internal Security Strategy in the European Union in the early months of 2010 raised not only expectations but also a number of questions from Brussels observers. Where did it come from? Who was behind the strategy? Does it represent the interests of the many actors involved in internal security cooperation? What will be its effect on actual cooperation and policy outcomes? This paper takes a historical perspective in helping to answer these questions. We examine the history of the ISS from three perspectives-its origin, its formulation, and its eventual content-and examine the extent to which those perspectives offer clues as to the likely impact of the ISS. Using some "ideal-type" benefits attributed to strategies generally-including political-symbolic benefits, cohering effects, and improved operational guidance-we assess whether the history of the ISS is likely to enable or constrain success. While further research is needed, our analysis of developments in the months after adoption of the ISS suggests that its history served to undermine its impact on cooperation generally and policymaking specifically.

Brexit has dominated the media and political landscape of the United Kingdom since the referendum of 2016. One interesting side effect of this has been the way the European Union – still the UK’s nearest and largest trading partner – has been discussed solely in terms of its role in the Brexit negotiations. Yet whatever the outcome of these discussions, what the European Union is and does will continue to affect not only its own citizens but also the UK itself.
(...)
Despite the much-vaunted unity that the 27 have displayed during the Brexit process, conflicts and tensions between member states, as well as between some of them and the EU institutions, persist. There remain fundamental disagreements between member states and institutions on issues like migration and the euro zone, not to mention more existential questions about future integration and the rule of law. Underlying everything are difficult to resolve differences on the balance of burden sharing.
- from the foreword by Professor Anand Menon, Director, The UK in a Changing Europe

This report presents perspective of the Institutions, selected member States and Policies.

To cite: Pachocka M., Szczerba-Zawada A., Migration, in: Priorities of the new European Commission and the interests of Poland. Team Europe’s assessments and conclusions, eds. J. Barcz, Z. Czachór, European Commission Representation in Poland, Warsaw 2019, pp. 79-84.

Recent years have seen a growing interest in international migrations and migration policy in the EU and its Member States, in particular following what is referred to as the migration and refugee crisis in Europe. This has resulted partly from the intensification of migration processes in the EU and its neighbourhood (mainly in the south), and partly from a wider media coverage and politicisation of the issue of migration, refugees, and international protection as well as integration of third country nationals in the host countries.

Lord Mance, prominent British judge, considers CJEU as “a central achievement of the European Union, a court with unparalleled transnational power”. This paper will explore the pros and cons of such powers and provide the insights of how such peculiar institution functions for the benefits of the European Union.

Positive conditionality has found intensive use by the European Union (EU) during last 20 years in the fields of enlargement and neighbourhood policy. It has also been in process of remarkable development and change during the period 1993-2011. The central interest of dissertation was to research which fundamental values and purposes EU pre-accession conditionality was serving. Was it fastest and most effective accession framework? Were these the interests of existing member states or representing the compromise for all sides? Did the target countries actually catch up the existing EU welfare level and which were the long term effects? Positive conditionality has not been used in similar terms during all six rounds of accession. The use of positive conditionality has been growing during the enlargement history and it has not been inevitable part of enlargement. Best results with positive conditionality were achieved during 5th accession round. Conditionality provided positive convergence effect in most candidate states, but the difference with EU average was not extraordinary and not all the candidate countries managed to use it for effective social and economic transition. Despite positive feedback from participants, 5th and 6th enlargements were the longest in the history and even after more than 10 years of preparation, Romania and Bulgaria were the poorest applicants ever accessed the EU. Research indicated connection between efficiency of conditionality and the commitment of target area. Accordingly, positive conditionality cannot be seen as universal enlargement policy model, as in cases of passive or sceptical recipient side, efficiency of model will drop, attempts to get results without influential “stick and carrot” were unsuccessful. Assessments and Progress Reports as part of positive conditionality were not used only to select candidate countries and evaluate their progress, but also to justify political reality.

В работе рассмотрены некоторые последствия референдума о выходе Великобритании из ЕС для институционально-политического развития Европейского союза и для отношений между ЕС и Великобританией.
The article discusses some implications of the Brexit referendum for institutional and political development of the European Union and for relations between the EU and the UK.

This edited volume offers different theories useful for understanding and explaining European Union cooperation on internal security matters. Cooperation on such matters has not only flourished over the past two decades, but - more recently - has also become one of the most politicised or contested areas of European integration. Yet academic studies in the field remain predominantly empirical or not readily accessible to new scholars.

The book addresses this major gap by providing a theoretical primer with a palette of options for explaining a complicated issue area, reaching across the divide of critical and more mainstream scholars that typically fragments discussion and debate. Theorizing Internal Security Cooperation in the European Union offers accessible and authoritative contributions by some of the most distinguished scholars in the field. Each chapter reviews the emergence of a major theoretical approach, the current state-of-the art for that approach, and the accompanying methodological considerations before providing an empirical illustration and an outlook on further research and dialogue with other perspectives. This book will serve as a central reference for developing our understanding of EU internal security cooperation, for exploring the ongoing transformation of statehood, and for illuminating the contemporary evolution of the European Union.

Craig and De Burca suggested in their text that "The story of the European Parliament is one of gradual transformation from a relatively powerless Assembly [...] to the considerably strengthened institution it represents today" 1 . When viewed from it's earliest possible historical origin through a speckled timeline of treaties as remedies to concerns as to a 'democratic deficit' or legitimacy, the power base has changed dramatically indeed. From simple joint venture to supreme legislative and judicial power the European project has steadily and perhaps blindly driven itself inescabably toward a paradox of purpose. The veiled goal of the federal state versus the idealogy of a peacful cooperative 'Deomcratic Legitimacy'. A paradox which will raise the question time and time again with the drafting and passing of every treaty or compact, every election and every ascension and expansion. One thing is perhaps certain; the perennial problems of the EU will not be resolved while this paradox of purpose exists. Emma Cutlip (nee Gallagher) L.LB (Hons) Irish Law UWE Bristol at Independent Colleges Dublin. 1948 holding discussion on economic and political union, the Dunkirk Treaty agreeing cooperation in security and millitary aid, and the rise of East v. West of the Cold War generally. Of course, their suggestion is that these various political manouvers merely created a climate for the first seed of the European Union 3 ; The Schuman declaration in 1950. The result was the Treaty of Paris and the formation of the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC). Some commentators have suggested this to be a populist notion from "a normative desire to write the history of European integration in a Hagelian perspective as the unstoppable ascendancy of federalist idealism over the nation-states and their internecine wars" 4 . From a coal and steel trade agreement between France, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg to a federal union consisting of 27 member states, a transformation has occured over numerous treaties. While the post war period is certainly the origin of the EU as we know it, it was not the first time the idea was concieved of. In 1693, William

The adoption of an Internal Security Strategy in the
European Union in the early months of 2010 raised
not only expectations but also a number of questions
from Brussels observers. Where did it come from?
Who was behind the strategy? Does it represent
the interests of the many actors involved in internal
security cooperation? What will be its effect on actual
cooperation and policy outcomes? This paper takes
a historical perspective in helping to answer these
questions. We examine the history of the ISS from
three perspectives – its origin, its formulation, and its
eventual content – and examine the extent to which
those perspectives offer clues as to the likely impact
of the ISS. Using some “ideal-type” benefits attributed
to strategies generally – including political-symbolic
benefits, cohering effects, and improved operational
guidance – we assess whether the history of the ISS
is likely to enable or constrain success. While further
research is needed, our analysis of developments in
the months after adoption of the ISS suggests that its
history served to undermine its impact on cooperation
generally and policymaking specifically.

" The book is divided in two parts:
• History of European integration: particular emphasis is put on the actors and their motivations. We tried to highlight the continuing tensions, characterizing the European integration process since the beginning, between the followers of the “community method” and the advocates of the national State’s predominance, a debate that has seen political scientists divided between scholars of (European) supranationality and of liberal intergovernamentalism. 
• Functioning of the EU institutions: in dealing with the EU institutional framework we highlighted in particular the changes occurred along the years, following the revisions of the original Treaties. The text is updated with the Treaty establishing a European Constitution, as signed in Rome on the 29th October 2004. We however discuss thoroughly the differences and simi-larities with the draft Constitutional Treaty, as prepared by the European Convention. A unique and stimulating insight of the debates inside the European Convention is offered by the articles written by Prof. Giuliano Amato and published in the newspaper Il Sole 24 Ore. For kind concession of the author and of Il Sole 24 Ore, we reproduce here some of the most interesting, under “Letters from Europe”.
"

The European Union has always been alleged of institutional democratic deficit with the claim that the main institutions of the Union suffer from democratic accountability. The debate on democratic deficit in the EU led to the Spitzenkandidaten system in 2014 in which European political parties nominated candidates for the president of the European Commission. The nomination of the candidates for the position of president of the Commission is considered as one of the important ways to make the institution accountable to EU voters through their representatives in the European Parliament. This paper examines the extent at which the introduction of Spitzenkandidaten influences voting behavior of the EU citizens in the 2014 European parliamentary elections, especially in the Member States of the two leading candidates nominated by the two major or largest, in terms of number of MEPs, European political parties in the EP. On the other hand, the paper critiques the claim on democratic deficit which largely borders on lack of accountability in the institutional framework of the EU in relation to decision making by adopting a teleological interpretation of the Treaties.     
     
Keywords: democratic deficit, Parliamentarization of the European Commission, accountability,
agenda setting, EU Treaties

Cytowanie: • Pachocka M., Szczerba-Zawada A., Migracje, w: Priorytety nowej Komisji Europejskiej a interesy Polski. Oceny i wnioski Team Europe, red. J. Barcz, Z. Czachór, Komisja Europejska Przedstawicielstwo w Polsce, Warszawa 2019, s. 77-82.


Zainteresowanie zagadnieniem migracji międzynarodowych i polityką migracyjną w UE i jej państwach członkowskich znacząco wzrosło w ostatnich latach, w szczególności w  związku z sytuacją określaną mianem kryzysu migracyjnego i uchodźczego w Europie. Częściowo wynikało to z nasilania się procesów migracyjnych w UE i jej sąsiedztwie (głównie południowym), a po części ze zmediatyzowania i upolitycznienia kwestii migracji, uchodźstwa i ochrony międzynarodowej oraz integracji cudzoziemców w państwach przyjmujących

The article adopts a socio-psychological perspective to approach financial regulation in the European Union. While behavioural approaches to finance have expanded the understanding of markets’ dynamics, the analytical tools of behavioural sciences have been seldom applied to financial regulators. Through the lenses of social-psychology, the article fills this gap and explores how financial regulators ‘think’. After offering a typology to navigate through the multi-layered EU architectural framework for financial markets regulation and supervisions, the socio-psychological dimension of selected EU institutions is examined by looking at their constitutional and legal framework. To this aim, the article focuses on the group dynamics within the primary decision-making organs of the European Commission, the European Central Bank, and the European Supervisory Authorities. These organs are considered as groups of individuals and their behaviours analysed through the prism of the ‘unified theory of social relations’. This approach is deployed to offer new insights over current tensions between Eurozone and non-Eurozone countries, and sheds new light over the fractures, within regulators, generated by the UK’s decision to leave the EU.

While the Treaty of Lisbon formally equipped national parliaments with powers to scrutinise EU legislation, five years after there is little satisfaction as regards parliamentary engagement in EU affairs. Due to its narrow scope, the early warning system of subsidiarity control and the two yellow cards issued thus far do not guarantee the desired influence of national parliaments at the EU level. Moreover, the Fiscal Compact and the European Stability Mechanism have further weakened parliamentary leverage in economic and fiscal governance. They have also exacerbated a sense of rivalry between some national parliaments and the European Parliament (EP). In this context, the “green card” (GC) initiative has been endorsed by several national parliamentary chambers, such as ADD. This initiative would enable national parliaments to make suggestions for EU legislative proposals. The GC deserves special attention because its implementation might challenge the established governance arrangements between national parliaments and the EP as well as between national parliaments and governments. This chapter analyses the GC proposal in view of its potential repercussions for inter-institutional and intra-institutional relations in the EU. Regarding the former, the chapter examines how the GC might affect the relations among national parliaments as well as between them and the EP. Regarding the latter, the analysis discusses whether the implementation of the GC would challenge domestic governance arrangements and parliamentary traditions within EU Member States. The chapter argues that granting national parliaments the right to propose EU legislation will not automatically increase EU democratic legitimacy.

The paper analyzes the shift from a politically neutral European Commission to a Commission whose President is nominated by the political party that wins most seats in the elections to the European Parliament. In the course of 2014 EP elections, the main European political parties nominated their candidates for president of the European Commission (the so-called Spitzenkandidaten) with the promise and the expectation that this linking of Presidency of the Commission with the outcome of EP elections would increase democratic legitimacy of the European Union. Consequently, the first part of the paper outlines the problem of legitimacy in the EU: the many meanings associated with the phrase and the institutional and constitutional setting that gives rise to the problem. It is argued that the actual problem of legitimacy is situated at the national rather than EU level, making the Spitzenkandidaten arrangement not only useless for enhancing legitimacy but directly harmful in this regard. The second part of the paper focuses on the factors that could undermine EU legitimacy as a direct result of politicization of the Commission. First, constitutionality of this innovation is scrutinized. Second, the institutional balance of Union institutions is considered. Third, the effects of the new arrangement on representation of Union citizens in the European political process are analyzed. Finally, an alternative solution for enhancing democratic legitimacy in the Union is presented. This solution lies with the European Parliament. Only real policy-setting powers of the European Parliament could shift the policy-setting power from national level to the EU. Accountability without power only obscures democratic legitimacy further.

Agenda-setting in the EU takes place in two ways: ‘from above’through high-level political institutions urging EU action, and ‘from below’through policy experts formulating specific proposals in low-level groups andworking parties. This article formulates a theoretical framework for understanding the differences between these two processes. Moreover, it shows how they may inter-act and become intertwined in the course of actual agenda-setting processes. Theutility of the approach is demonstrated in two contrasting case studies: one of EU anti-smoking policy and one of EU anti-bioterrorism policy.

This study, commissioned by the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs at the request of the AFCO Committee, provides an overview of transparency and integrity-related elements in the current EU setting, covering both substantive elements (including, in particular, conflict of interest and revolving-doors) as well as the body in charge of ethical control and guidance. Based on a comparison covering France, Ireland and Canada, this study proposes an ‘Independent Ethics Body’ (IEB) via a new interinstitutional agreement.

INTRODUCTION - I. RE-EXAMINATION. EUROPEAN POLYSYNODY – I.1. The initiative phase: expert governmental committees, interest committees and scientific committees. –  I.2. The legislative phase: Council committees. –  I.3. The executive phase: comitology. – II. RE-CONSTRUCTION. EU COMMITTEES “PONDER” AND “COMPOSE”. – II.1. Pondering: enhancing the quality of European law. – II.2. Composing: preventing political conflicts. – III. RE-CONCEPTUALIZATION. COMMITTEES AND EUROPEAN SUPRANATIONALISM: DELIBERATIVE OR PROCEDURAL? – III.1. Between ‘normative and ‘decisional’: the third character of European supranationalism. – III.2. Committees and their supranationalism: ‘deliberative’ or ‘procedural’? – CONCLUSIONS

This book examines how membership of the European Union has affected life in the ten former communist countries of Central and Eastern Europe that are now members of the European Union. It attempts to answer some fundamental questions: Was the reward of EU membership worth the sacrifices made? How have the new member states fared? Has the promise of EU membership, on which so many expectations were based, been realised? Or have the new member states traded a Socialist Commonwealth with Moscow pulling the strings for an over-centralised Brussels bureaucracy that lacks transparency and accountability? How has a shared communist past influenced the countries’ post-socialist and post-accession trajectory? How have the populations of post-communist Europe fared? Have some done better than others? Are these divergences confined to the political, economic or social spheres, or to more than one? If there have been disappointments, how have the populations reacted to these?

... Author: Catriona Gourlay, Damien Helly, Isabelle Ioannides, Radek Khol, Agnieszka Nowak and Pedro Serrano Source: European Union Institute for Security Studies (EU ISS) Source-URL: http://www.iss-eu.org/ Document-URL: http://www.iss-eu.org/chaillot/chai90.pdf Date ...

Исследована институциональная реформа ЕС в начале 2000-х годов. В частности, рассмотрены тренд конституционализации ЕС, соотношение ценностей эффективности и баланса, дефицит легитимности и попытки его преодоления, развитие гибкой интеграции в ЕС.

The article analyses the European Fund for Strategic Investments, from an institutional and material perspective. It highlights its hybrid and sui generis nature, and it defines its legal status as an auxiliary body of the European Investment Bank. To this end, the article first sheds light on the functioning of the Fund and on the distribution of competences between its organs. The article then focuses on the political, hierarchical and jurisdictional control systems on the EFSI, and on the institutional corollaries stemming from such a control, also with regards to the legitimacy of the Fund vis-à-vis primary law. Third, the article singles out the main legal obstacles to the smooth functioning of the EFSI, by looking more particularly to the treaty provisions on state aid and budgetary policy coordination. Finally, the article concludes by undertaking a preliminary assessment of the costs and benefits of the EFSI and by emphasising the consistency between the policy strategy behind the establishment of the Fund and the wider institutional development trends within the EU legal order.

If we evaluate the provisions in the Treaty concerning the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) we can conclude that the CFSP is de facto different from other EU policies. It is the only policy that has all the provisions in the TEU, it has special legal instruments, sui generis competences, all the EU institutions have special competences in the field of the CFSP, etc. It is not a coincidence; the current regulation of the CFSP is caused by the strong pressure of the Member States, obviously they wanted to preserve their national foreign politics. However, Lisbon Treaty has put a major imperative on the process of straightening the coherence between Unions policies and activities. It is the obligation of the Union to ensure consistency between the different areas of Union’s external action and between these and its other policies. How can we, in the current EU political situation, untangle this challenge? This paper provides proposal for transferring the large number of the Treaty provisions concerning the CFSP to TFEU. On the first glance, this can seem like a nomotechnical proposal, but in reality it can have strong political and legislative impact on the structure of the CFSP and by that on the EU. The proposal provided in this paper will be in the accordance with the political situation in the EU and it could be acceptable to the EU countries, while, on the other hand, it can have an impact on the improvement of the CFSP and EU structure.