European institutions

In standard textbook accounts, the history of European Community (EC) environmental policy conventionally begins in 1973, when the First Environmental Action Programme was officially accepted. Some texts also mention the Paris summit of October 1972 and the subsequent ministerial meeting of the member states in Bonn on 31 October 1972, where the governments agreed in principle and in detail on the start of environmental policy measures at EC level. 1 Even though these were important steps, putting the new policy on track, the origins of EC environmental policy actually go back to the summer of 1969. The new policy was not simply the result of the enlightened environmental spirit of national governments still under the impression of the Stockholm United Nations (UN) Conference on the Human Environment in June 1972. In fact, EC environmental action can be traced back to an initiative by what is usually believed to be the least powerful of European institutions, the unelected European Parliament (EP). The EP first put the issue of water pollution on the agenda of the European institutions via an own initiative report, one of the few instruments available to it. 2 Members of the EP (MEPs) responded to a massive fish kill in the river Rhine, Western Europe's main watershed, in June 1969, caused by a pesticide released in Germany. The Dutch were particularly cross with their German neighbours upstream, not only because they had not been notified, but also because they crucially relied on Rhine for their water resources. Activist MEPs from the Committee of Public Health and Social Affairs skilfully widened the issue from the Rhine to river and water pollution more generally, to other issues, such as noise and air pollution, that contemporary scientists and policy makers increasingly conceptualised as part of the problem called the "environment". MEPs argued for the introduction of European level policy action on such environmental issues.

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

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 open access book explores the new complexities and ambiguities that epitomize EU-Turkey relations. With a strong focus on the developments in the last decade, the book provides full access to a comprehensive understanding of the multifaceted relationship through three entry points: (1) Theories and Concepts, (2) Institutions, and (3) Policies. Part I brings together complementary and competing analytical approaches to study the evolution of EU-Turkey relations, ranging from traditional integration theories to novel concepts. Part II investigates the institutional machinery of EU-Turkey relations by analyzing the roles and perspectives of the European Council, the European Commission, and the European Parliament. Part III offers analyses of the policies most relevant for the relationship: enlargement policy, trade and macroeconomic policies, foreign and security policy, migration and asylum policies, and energy policy. In Part IV, the volume closes with a systematic survey of the conditions under which cooperative trends in EU-Turkey relations could be (re)invigorated. The systematic setup and the balanced combination of distinguished experts from EU- and Turkey-based institutions make this book a fundamental reading for students, researchers, lecturers, and practitioners of EU-Turkey relations, European integration and Turkish foreign policy.

The aim of this PhD thesis is to review and re-envisage the foundation and development of the European People’s Party (EPP). This Thesis is based on primary research data aiming to inspire the academic discussion on the Europarties within the European integration context. Starting from its creation and early-days period, in the 1970s, as the ‘party’ of the Christian Democratic parties from member states of the European Communities and going through the subsequent integration of political parties from Western and, later on, Eastern European countries, in the 1980s and 1990s to its status at the early 2000s.
The originally founded ‘Christian Democratic organisation’ was transformed to a political family, or a ‘network’, of centre-right parties including Christian democratic, conservative and like minded parties. We will attempt to understand why this change took place, under what reasons, dependent and independent variables, normative conditions, within the historical context. We will follow the timeline of events in the wider context of the European integration that has been underlining, historically, our subject.
Our Thesis is structured in two axes: A timeline of ten chapters on the one hand and four hypotheses that we are putting forward. We have also constructed and put in annex information that can be helpful for further research. Highlights are on Annex 8 the list of contents that we have reconstructed from the historical archive of the EPP. First we walk through the historical timeline:
In “Chapter 1: History” we start from the years preceding to the creation of the EPP. We go back to the origins of transnational party cooperation walking through to the discussions in the 1970s for launching new European party federations. We took time to explore not just the EPP historical archive (Codification IX-007-XXX) but also the EUCD archive (IX-004-XXX) and even some volumes from the NEI historical archive (IX-002-XXX) mainly to get familiar with the level of integration of the earlier organisations and historical period in the 1950s and the 1960s.
In “Chapter 2: the creation of the EPP” the reader will find presentation of historical archive accumulated from both archive documents and interviews. We aim to better understand all the aspects behind the creation of the EPP in 1976. We reveal the underlining factors cultivating the desire for a new political organisation, the map of interest of the key players and why it finally kicked off the ground in 1976.
In “Chapter 3: the enlargement of the 1980s” we move on the 1980s, the change of leadership twice in the EPP, in 1984 and 1987, the enlargement of the EPP with new parties from western Europe and the talks about opening up towards the Conservatives.
In “Chapter 4: the opening up of Eastern Europe” we discuss the opening up of the EPP towards the countries of the former Eastern block in central and eastern Europe and the major historical events of the collapse of communism and the emerging new European countries. 
In “Chapter 5: the enlargement to the conservative parties” we explore the opening up to more conservative parties in the 1990s, especially towards the 1994 enlargement, the difficult Scandinavian conservative parties.
In “Chapter: 6 Merger with the EUCD and the EDU” we follow the developments between the EPP and its sister orgsanisations. We put forward all the evidence that demonstrates the core strategy of the EPP to streamline the cooperation in the centre right into one single organisation despite the successful history and record of the EDU and the ‘parent organisation’ background of the EUCD.
In “Chapter 7: Understanding and assessing the EPP enlargement” we touch upon the Europeanisation concept, particularly in Eastern Europe and we contending that it has had different implications to different parties from different countries. Aiming to address these phenomena, we are introducing the term “inhomogenus Europeanisation” to capture this diversity of effects in the political reality of the actors involved. We are further assessing the enlargement beyond Christian Democracy in the context of its historical decline.
Finally, we are reviewing the role of the key protagonists and the German actors in particular, who from a minority position to the right side of the EPP spectrum in the 1970s and 80s it became the dominant power in the centre of the EPP from the 1990s hitherto.
In “Chapter 8: The EPP beyond 1999” we are discussing the developments in the 2000s, the years of reaping the fruits of its enlargement strategy in terms of its parliamentary and party size. After the enlargements of 2004 and 2007, where the EU moved from 15 to 27 member states the EPP continued its restructuring and repositioning. In every single country of the EU enlargement, the EPP had already acquired the most important center-right political party in its ranks.
In “Chapter 9: Europarties and European integration” we are discussing the role of European parties within the European Union institutions and decision making. We are also discussing the widely debated concept of politicization of the Union from the perspective of European parties. This discussion is relevant today in the period of the ongoing financial trouble in the Eurozone and how the crisis has affected the role of the European parties.

Finally, in “Chapter 10: Summary and end remarks” we are putting together the findings from our research findings and secondary sources reading and drawing conclusions on our topic.

The second axis of this work, running parallel to the Timeline, is to contemplate four hypotheses. Each one of them has come out of the primary research for the historical period involved, while it does revisit aspects of what we know today.
The first hypothesis focuses on the foundation period in the 1970s where we will present evidence that the EPP was not founded as a loose federation of parties that would evolve over time and parallel to the gradual integration of the European institutions. Insofar the European Communities did evolve gradually from the mid-1970s to the early 2000s following Treaty reform that delegated more and more powers and competences to the Community level, there is a broader understanding that the EPP followed a similar pattern of integration. We are challenging this universal idea with facts and figures from the historical archive that are probably brought about for the first time.
The second hypothesis is related to the enlargement of the EPP towards non-Christian democratic parties. We will present that the original idea was not to enlarge to parties from other, albeit neighboring, political traditions. Instead, the original expectation was that these parties would adopt, would adhere to Christian Democracy. The idea of enlargement did not exist in the EPP culture and language during its early days in the 1980s and even early 1990s! Surprising or not, prospective members cooperated with this attitude and declared their adherence to the Christian Democratic ideals, regardless of their differing political culture and diverging national context. This applies to parties from both western and eastern Europe.
The third hypothesis reveals the strategy of the EPP towards its enlargement during the 1980s and 1990s, in particular as regards the emerging of new democracies in the central and eastern parts of Europe after the collapse of Communism. Opposite to what we knew up to now the EPP designed and implemented an active policy of proliferation of Christian Democracy towards the new countries and invested significant human and material resources in this direction. We have had very little information before about this but the evidence we bring in is strong and sound. Given that Christian Democracy was already in decline in western Europe in the late 1980s and the early 1990s this hypothesis says a lot about the culture and the internal dynamics of the EPP. The strategy originated and was inspired by the case of Spain in the late 1980s with the creation of the Partido Popular. Following Spain, the most difficult case of the British Conservatives was explored with a long-lasting project that took over two years to complete with the 1992 agreement between the EPP group and the European Democratic Group in the European Parliament. From the early 1990s, a large project of going east was deployed towards the new democracies.
Last but not least, our fourth hypothesis contemplates the comparative perspective of the EPP today with its early days. Contrary to what is widely accepted, even from skeptics, the EPP today is not more integrated than it was in the early days. The small number of members, the high degree of ideological cohesion and the core ideals of Christian Democracy were the three key factors that, aggregated together, created a highly integrated status. Especially given the broader loose integration of the European Communities. This hypothesis can have significant implications that challenge traditional theories' content about the progress of integration.

"The European Union is facing a profound crisis and is confronted with multiple challenges. Over the last two decades, it has experienced a series of dramatic changes to its powers, its institutional design, its constitutional framework and its borders. At the same time, the uneasy relationship between European citizens and elites has complicated both the reform and the function of the Union. While the Lisbon treaty provided some answers to crucial questions, it did not clarify the nature of the EU, which remains at the crossroads of federal and intergovernmental logic. The current economic and financial crisis puts the EU’s legitimacy further under pressure and creates the impression of a turning point.

This book provides a concise analysis of the EU and its dynamics by paying particular attention to its day to day operation. It aims to help students and scholars understand its evolution, its institutions, its decision-making and the interactions between the EU and various actors. Avoiding abstract theorizing, the authors propose an easy to read analysis of how the Union works while recognizing the complexity of the situation. Throughout the book, the key issues of European integration are addressed: democratic deficit, politicization, the role of member states, institutional crisis and citizen involvement.

The outcome of the Brexit referendum is the apex of a long history of Euro-British relationships characterised by two opposing but coexisting stereotypes. On the one hand, England appears as the freedom-seeking nation resisting restrictive collective policies imposed by a totalitarian EU regime of faceless Brussels bureaucrats. On the other hand, England seems to resurrect its imperialistic superiority against the purported democracy and horizontality of European institutions. Adopting the notion of “cultural intimacy”—with which Michael Herzfeld analyzes the mutual engagement of contrasting positions in political and administrative practices—this paper addresses the equally stereotypical images of an indifferent, inhuman European bureaucracy and of an insular, cynical Great Britain in the works of Malcolm Bradbury and Tim Parks. Be it the allegedly liberal yet nationalistic stance of Thatcherist anti-Europeanism in Bradbury, or the British disaffection with the purported identitarian and cultural levelling within the common borders of the Schengen area and of the single currency, both authors’ symbolic constructions of European institutions and of British Euroscepticism are built as cultural entanglements of these two realities, and show the need to overcome the reductive conception of Europe as a failed super-state.

The enlargement of the European Union (EU) has always been a topic of interest for specialists in International Relations. The study was focused (and still is) on the accession process (we include here the concern regarding the motivation of states to join the organization and the impact that EU integration has on the policies of those specific states). However, we find less concern regarding the impact of the accession of new states on the organization. The purpose of this study is to show the changes that Croatia’s accession bring to the institutional structure and decision-making process of the European Union, considering that the organization is currently going through a process of institutional reform, marked by the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon.

This contribution introduces the concept of ‘activism’ to the study of EU supranational institutions and their role in EU policy making and European integration. While long present in studies of the European Court of Justice, ‘activism’ has rarely been examined systematically in the context of analyses of other supranational institutions. This contribution offers a definition of ‘supranational institutional activism’, examines its analytical usefulness in relation to other concepts such as ‘entrepreneurship’ and through the lens of a number of political science and EU integration theories and analytical approaches. The specific analytical insights derived from the disciplines of political science, history and legal scholarship of the twelve articles of this special edition on ‘supranational institutional activism’ are also considered. While the powers and roles of EU supranational institutions have been examined in numerous studies, this article presents a concept that can contribut...

Tras atravesar su crisis más profunda, los líderes europeos disponen de cerca de un año,
hasta la celebración de las elecciones europeas de mayo de 2019, para poner en marcha
algunas de las propuestas planteadas para reformar las instituciones y democratizar la
Unión Europea. El presente artículo trata de explicar las causas y consecuencias de la
deriva intergubernamental sufrida en la última década para, posteriormente, analizar y
valorar las propuestas planteadas para su reforma, en particular, la elección indirecta del
presidente de la Comisión, la reducción del número de comisarios, la doble Presidencia de la Comisión y el Consejo Europeo, y la elaboración de listas transnacionales.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze and interpret the effects of the Euro crisis on the European institutional system and on the quality of its democracy and to examine the incomplete European integration process both political and economic.
Since the Maastricht Treaty, and then the Lisbon Treaty, the EU has a dual method of decision-making: one supranational and the other intergovernmental. During the crisis period, we have assisted to a grow of the latter at the expense of the community method. The crisis has obliged EU institutions to take action against it. This necessity to act quickly has shown weaknesses of the decision-making system and difficulties in promoting and implement accountable policies. The crisis had the dual effect to show that: Firstly, the responses that the institution gave to deal with it affected negatively the quality of democracy in Europe. Secondly, the European integration process needs to be completed both economically and politically.

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.

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.

Para. 1 was introduced by the Nice Treaty of 2001; after the experience of the ' Austrian case' in 2000 (see belowThird Part) it was felt that the EU should have an 'early warning mechanism before serious and persistent violations have actually happened. 27 See below Third Part. 28 See below Third Part.

The institutions of the EU underlie permanent influences from various sides. The resignation of the UK marks definitely a major impact on European Integration development. Analysing the transformations of power of the different EU institutions draws a picture surprisingly indicating an increase of significance of the supranational institutions. The EP used its power to consent or refuse to influence t he negotiation preferences. The EC officially lead the negotiations and could contribute with in-depth knowledge but communicated with so-far unknown transparency and inclusiveness. As there were no major differences in the single countries' interests except the Irish special interest, the Council's influences on the negotiations were limited. The Brexit negotiations were primarily shaped by the supranational institutions what can mark a turning point in the institutional imbalances through the domination of the New Intergovernmentalism.

The European Union is at a make-or-break moment. The current crisis could be beneficial or detrimental for its future. We revisit Schmitter’s model of crisis-induced decision-making cycles (1970) and critically discuss why the current crisis might not be as benign as originally thought.

Brexit has become one of the hot topics in the last few years. In June 2016, the UK voted for leaving the EU and, since then, the process has been going on. For the first time in the EU history, a member state has started a process for leaving the EU. Many researchers focused on this topic and its possible impacts on the European Union (EU). In this study, the effect of Brexit is researched in terms of English as one of the 24 official languages of the EU. Multilingualism is an important part of the language policy of the EU and the status of English has a special importance in this policy area as being both one of the official and working languages of the EU. The aim of this study is to research how this status will change after the UK leaves the EU.

Mutamenti della sovranità e vincolo "concorrenziale". Per un'analisi critica e comparata della costruzione istituzionale europea di Domenico Caldaralo La legittimazione dei poteri normativi delle autorità indipendenti: una questione ancora aperta di Michele Barone Le trasformazioni della costituzione economica europea negli anni della grande crisi. Una prospettiva di International Political Economy di Adriano Cozzolino Appunti su alcuni risvolti istituzionali della politica monetaria della BCE: crisi della forma politica e legittimazione tecnocratica di Luigi Sica Anti-austerity. La crisi nell'Europa neoliberale di Paolo Scanga Indice dei nomi PRESENTAZIONE 14 Per una introduzione al problema del «capitalismo organizzato» e delle tematiche connesse, cfr. l'ottimo saggio di E.

The European Union is at a make-or-break moment. The current crisis could be beneficial or detrimental for its future. We revisit Schmitter’s model of crisis-induced decision-making cycles (1970) and critically discuss why the current crisis might not be as benign as originally thought.

Доклад посвящен анализу институционального развития ЕС. В первой части доклада проводится комплексный анализ трансформации Европейских сообществ из организации экономической интеграции в Европейский союз – политический союз наднационального характера с широкой компетенцией. Во второй части на примере Ниццкого договора анализируется повестка дня институциональной реформы на современном этапе и основные сложности этого процесса. В третьей части особое внимание уделено двум стратегическим тенденциям: фрагментации правового пространства ЕС и увеличению разрыва между процессом принятия решений и населением в условиях отсутствия общеевропейской идентичности.
The report is devoted to the analysis of institutional development of the EU. Part 1 of the report contains the thorough analysis of the transformation of European Communities – organization of economic integration – into the European Union – political union of supranational character with wide competen-cies. In Part 2 the agenda of nowadays institutional reform and the main difficulties of this process are investigated on the ex-ample of the Nice Treaty. In Part 3 the main attention is paid to two strategic tendencies: fragmentation of the EU legal area and increasing gap between population and decision making process in the absence of common European identity.

This contribution introduces the concept of ‘activism’ to the study of EU supranational institutions and their role in EU policy making and European integration. While long present in studies of the European Court of Justice, ‘activism’ has rarely been examined systematically in the context of analyses of other supranational institutions. This contribution offers a definition of ‘supranational institutional activism’, examines its analytical usefulness in relation to other concepts such as ‘entrepreneurship’ and through the lens of a number of political science and EU integration theories and analytical approaches. The specific analytical insights derived from the disciplines of political science, history and legal scholarship of the twelve articles of this special edition on ‘supranational institutional activism’ are also considered. While the powers and roles of EU supranational institutions have been examined in numerous studies, this article presents a concept that can contribute to a more systematic and comprehensive understanding of the contribution of these entities to EU policy making and European integration.

http://cadmus.eui.eu//handle/1814/44987
The present study combines practical experience with the implementation of Union law 'on the ground' with an academic approach. It intends to facilitate the interpretation of the fundamental values mentioned in Article 2 TEU and their main enforcement mechanism, Article 7 TEU, by putting them in a historical and comparative context. Both prove the importance of 'homogeneity-provisions' and their enforcement but also illustrate how rarely similar clauses have been used in other multilayer systems. From a practical perspective, the study shows the dilemma the Commission faces when confronted with the question whether to commence a formal procedure under Article 7 TEU. It has two options: either it opens the formal procedure or not. In the first scenario the initiative either finds the necessary majority in the Council/ European (Commission 'gets it right') or it does not (Commission would be overdoing it, " false positive "). In the second scenario, it could happen that the necessary majorities for Article 7 TEU could have been obtained (" false negative "). The present study gives examples for all three outcomes (Weimar, Wallace and Vienna) and illustrates their consequences. It also shows alternative ways for the enforcement of the Fundamental Values protected by Article 2 TEU such as the infringement procedure under Article 258 TEU.
http://cadmus.eui.eu//handle/1814/44987

This short paper seeks to answer a precise question: Is the EU Commission now controlled by other European institutions?. Considering the progressive integration process of the European Union over decades from one hand and the complex institutional form of the union today, the Commission has been going through several changes and challenges to cope with the Union's developments and broadening scope. This paper discusses how the COMM’s competences developed over the last three decades, how it was able to gain “Extra” powers in light of the Enlargement process and the global  financial crisis, and finally how the relations between the COMM and other EU institutions are defined after Lisbon Treaty (LT) in order to assess the COMM’s autonomy among other EU institutions.

This article focuses on the role of regional institutions and political practices in strengthening multilateral disarmament and non-proliferation regimes. Particular attention is devoted to coordination between Brazil and Argentina with a view to forging a "South American position" vis-à-vis the Biological and Toxins Weapons Convention (BTWC). Empirical evidence suggests that informal arrangements between the two countries were capable of involving other South American leaders and promoting the exchange of information among different groups of states, most notably during the 2006 BTWC review conference. This paper also sheds light on the identification of specific features that allow for increasing visibility and actorness of regional powers in promoting universality of MSRs, as well as the limitations faced by these players.

La dénonciation du déficit démocratique est un thème récurrent de la construction européenne. La faiblesse originelle des pouvoirs attribués au Parlement européen et la déperdition de ceux traditionnellement recon-nus au Parlement français ont longtemps nourri le débat. En conséquence, chacun a élaboré des stratégies visant la reconnaissance de nouvelles prérogatives. Si le Parlement français a, de son côté, multiplié les instruments de contrôle pesant sur le Gouvernement, pour autant, en aucun cas son action ne peut pré-tendre rivaliser avec celle du Parlement européen. Sa sphère d'action est nationale, tandis que celle de son homologue est davantage pertinente en ayant pour cadre général l'Union européenne. Toutefois, le temps n'est plus à une opposition entre ces deux institutions ; chacun agit de manière complémentaire soit en participant directement à l'édiction des actes de l'Union européenne, soit en contrôlant celle-ci auprès de l'exécutif national.

In this paper, the controls exercised over the European Commission by the other EU institutions listed in article 13 of the TEU are analysed, focusing more on the relationship with the European Council, the Council and the European Parliament. While the regulatory powers on competition rules are almost untouchable, the legislative and enforcement powers of the Commission are framed and balanced, and the College of Commissioners is controlled by a tie of confidence of the European Council and  the Parliament.
In the first paragraph, the arguments describing formal and informal controls reflect an intergovernmentalist view, where the Commission is subservient to the European Council. In the second paragraph, reasons that the supranational power of the Commission is still strong and fundamental are presented. The final answer considers both approaches to the question.