Abstract
There is a broad consensus that courts play a significant role in the process of European integration. By giving rulings on preliminary references the European Court of Justice (ECJ) asserted the two central principles "supremacy" and "direct effect", which transformed the treaty into something like a constitution. The interaction between national judges and the ECJ through the preliminary reference procedure eased this process, but not all member states used this possibility in the same degree. Whereas German, Italian and Austrian judges widely used this procedure in recent years, other countries like France, Ireland, Spain and Portugal hardly did. In this empirical analysis, which is based on data covering all current member states, I try to find some general explanations and fundamental aspects of variance in preliminary references by applying Europeanization and political-institutional theory.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
1.1. The Preliminary Ruling Procedure
1.2. Historical Background
1.3. The Traditional Model and Its Extension
2. Theoretical Framework and Hypotheses
2.1. Europeanization
2.2. Political-Institutional Theory
2.3. Judicial Structure
3. Analysis Framework
3.1. Research Design
3.2. Operationalization
4. Empirical Analysis
4.1. The Impacts of Europeanization on Preliminary References
4.2. Multiple Regression Analysis
5. Conclusions and Review
6. Appendixes
6.1. Appendix 1 – Tabular Scheme of Operationalization and Data Source
6.2. Appendix 2 - Correlation Matrix
7. References
Research Objectives and Themes
This paper aims to explain the variance in the number of preliminary references submitted by national courts to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) across different EU member states. The core research question addresses why some member states frequently utilize this procedure while others are significantly more reluctant, testing the impact of Europeanization, national political structures, and judicial frameworks.
- Analysis of Europeanization and adaptational pressures on national legal systems.
- Evaluation of political-institutional theories, specifically the impact of federalism versus unitarism.
- Investigation of the influence of judicial structure and constitutional review powers.
- Empirical testing through multiple regression analysis using aggregated member state data.
Excerpt from the Book
1.1 The Preliminary Ruling Procedure
The ECJ has under article 234 (ex Article 177) jurisdiction to give preliminary rulings on references by national courts (see box below). Under this procedure, national courts can ask for the ECJ to make a judgement on any case brought before them that relates to any aspect of European Union (EU) law, and the ECJ ruling is then used by the national courts in their own judgement on the case in hand. Simon Hix shows that national courts give the final ruling on many cases of EU law, which was probably the intention of the drafters of the Treaty of Rome. Furthermore the direct link between national courts and the ECJ through the preliminary ruling mechanism is seen as critical force behind national adaptation to Europeanization (Alter 1996: 466; Conant 2001: 97; Hix 1999: 107).
As we see in article 234 the ECJ needs a co-operation with national courts, especially lower courts, because only courts of last instance are obliged to refer questions to the ECJ, but even the highest national courts will find some excuses for withholding references. Even an ECJ judge agreed that the ECJ essentially required the co-operation of national courts (Golub 1996: 362).
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: This chapter introduces the preliminary ruling procedure under Article 234 and outlines the historical development and scholarly models regarding the usage of this mechanism.
2. Theoretical Framework and Hypotheses: The author develops four working hypotheses based on Europeanization, political-institutional theory, and judicial structure to explain the variance in national reference behavior.
3. Analysis Framework: This section defines the research design, the selection of variables, and the operationalization methods used for the empirical testing of the hypotheses.
4. Empirical Analysis: This chapter presents the statistical results, including a linear regression on Europeanization impacts and a multiple regression analysis considering political and judicial variables.
5. Conclusions and Review: The author summarizes the findings, concluding that federalism significantly correlates with reference frequency, while other institutional factors show varied or insignificant effects.
6. Appendixes: Provides the operationalization scheme and the correlation matrix used for the empirical analysis.
7. References: A comprehensive list of academic sources and legal documents cited in the paper.
Keywords
European Court of Justice, Preliminary Ruling, Europeanization, Preliminary References, Political-Institutional Theory, Federalism, Judicial Structure, Constitutional Court, Adaptational Pressures, Member States, Legal Integration, Multiple Regression Analysis, European Law, Supremacy, Direct Effect.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core subject of this paper?
The paper examines the reasons behind the significant differences in the number of preliminary references that national courts from various EU member states submit to the European Court of Justice.
Which theoretical fields are used to analyze the topic?
The study primarily utilizes Europeanization theory and political-institutional theory to determine how national structures influence judicial cooperation with the ECJ.
What is the primary research goal?
The goal is to explain why some states are highly active in referring cases to the ECJ while others remain reluctant, specifically testing the impact of federal versus unitary systems and the role of constitutional courts.
What scientific method is employed?
The author uses a quantitative approach, specifically linear and multiple regression analysis, based on aggregated statistics of member state behavior from 1952 to 2002.
What does the main body cover?
It covers the historical context of the preliminary ruling procedure, the development of specific hypotheses regarding national political and judicial structures, and the statistical testing of these hypotheses.
Which keywords characterize the work?
Key terms include Europeanization, preliminary ruling, judicial structure, federalism, adaptational pressures, and the European Court of Justice.
How does the author explain the high number of references from Germany?
The author explores whether Germany's federal political structure is a primary driver for this extraordinary activity, though he notes that this is part of a broader multiple regression analysis.
What role does the Italian Constitutional Court play in the findings?
The Italian case serves as a detailed example where initial legal reluctance, caused by the Constitutional Court, evolved over time, highlighting that internal judicial dynamics can significantly impact national reference activity.
What is the conclusion regarding the "goodness of fit" theory?
The paper concludes that while the "goodness of fit" theory is useful, it cannot fully explain the variance in references at an aggregate level without considering the influence of specific political institutions like federalism.
- Citation du texte
- MScEc Michael Kiener (Auteur), 2003, Europeanization by the Courts, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/186039
