The question posed in this paper relates to the latest EU-Commission President Elections and the European Parliament's role in them. The examination of this question is imperative since recent literature on the subject has regarded the situation of the democratic deficit within the Union as simply "putting a little more weight" on the average's citizen's vote by convincing them that they are also voting for not just national representatives, but for Commission President, as well.
Unfortunately, this is a matter usually ignored in today's studies on the subject. This paper, therefore, describes the whole election process and explains the election process in 2014 (Jean-Claude Juncker), all specifications, all differences and circumstances. However, it gives some interesting conclusions on what the EP's real motivation was?
However, it is not clear whether it was power, policy or democracy. If we take for granted that different motivations might have existed, and ask why the European Council accepted the "Spitzenkandidaten" procedure, we will reach some interesting conclusions. Formally, the Council is in charge of nominating the Commission president, and member states until then have always wanted to keep this privilege. Hence, exploring the issue what important member states said about the EP's initiative, how they reacted, and why some of them in the end gave their assent will be beneficial for the essay.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. The election process
3. Conclusion
Research Objectives and Key Topics
This paper examines the 2014 European Commission President elections and the role of the European Parliament, specifically analyzing the impact and motivations behind the "Spitzenkandidaten" procedure, its effect on the EU's institutional power dynamics, and the broader implications for the democratic deficit within the Union.
- The evolution of the "Spitzenkandidaten" concept and its "lead candidate" mechanism.
- Institutional power struggle between the European Parliament and the European Council.
- Analysis of the democratic legitimacy and voter participation in European elections.
- Political maneuverings within the EU during the 2014 nomination process.
- Evaluation of whether the process effectively addressed the "democratic deficit".
Excerpt from the Book
The election process
As abovementioned the subject of the analysis will be the previous elections, namely those of 2014. Simply put, the latter will be done via the purpose of examing the changes that have taken place in the act of choosing a Commission president. The most significant change that took place in those election was the procedure of “Spitzenkandidaten”. Literally meaning "lead candidates", it basically represented the introduction of rival candidates from the different European-level parties. In 2013, the S&D proclaimed Schulz as “Spitzenkandidat”, the party’s choice for head of the European Commission. The Liberals and Greens followed their example with their nominations by forcing the EPP to nominate their own frontrunner, tying their hands with regard to manoeuvring within the European Council. As a matter of fact, that was the first stage of the so-called by Janning "silent revolution"; and indeed it was silent. What I mean is that all the rhetoric and public attention was focused on the selling proposition of strengthening European democracy by giving voters a choice on who would lead the EU’s executive body (Janning, 2014).
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: Outlines the nomination and election process of the Commission President and introduces the "Spitzenkandidaten" campaign as a significant shift in institutional politics.
2. The election process: Analyzes the 2014 elections, focusing on the implementation of the "Spitzenkandidaten" procedure and the ensuing power struggle between European institutions regarding the legitimacy of candidates.
3. Conclusion: Summarizes that the "Spitzenkandidaten" procedure, while intended to promote democracy, primarily served as a tool for institutional power shifts and highlights the ongoing challenge of the EU's democratic deficit.
Keywords
Spitzenkandidaten, European Commission, European Parliament, European Council, European Elections, Democratic Deficit, Jean-Claude Juncker, Political Parties, Institutional Power, Nomination Process, European Integration, Political Legitimacy, 2014 Elections.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the fundamental focus of this paper?
This paper focuses on the 2014 European Commission President elections and the specific role the European Parliament played in transforming the nomination process through the "Spitzenkandidaten" procedure.
What are the central themes discussed in the work?
The central themes include the shift in institutional authority between the European Parliament and the European Council, the quest for democratic legitimacy in the EU, and the political motivations of the major party factions.
What is the primary research goal?
The goal is to analyze the "Spitzenkandidaten" procedure to determine whether the Parliament's initiative was driven by a genuine desire for democratic reform, increased power, or specific policy interests.
Which scientific method does the author employ?
The author employs a qualitative analysis of the 2014 election process, drawing upon existing academic literature, political commentary, and institutional documentation to evaluate the impact of the new nomination procedure.
What content is covered in the main body of the paper?
The main body examines the history of the nomination process, the details of the 2014 "Spitzenkandidaten" campaign, the reactions of member states like the UK and Germany, and the resulting institutional dynamics.
Which keywords best characterize this publication?
Key terms include Spitzenkandidaten, European Commission, democratic deficit, institutional power, and European integration.
How did the role of the European Council change in 2014?
The Council, which traditionally held the privilege of nominating the Commission President through consensus, faced a new challenge as the Parliament used the "Spitzenkandidaten" process to impose their own lead candidates on the political agenda.
What was the "silent revolution" mentioned by the author?
It refers to the process by which political parties introduced rival candidates, effectively forcing the hands of the European Council and maneuvering within the established institutional structures to shift power toward the Parliament.
Why was the "Spitzenkandidaten" procedure considered controversial?
It was controversial because it was perceived by some member states and the Council as an attempt by the European Parliament to overstep its traditional role and exert undue influence on the selection of the Commission President.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Silvia Stamenova (Autor:in), 2017, The latest EU-Commission President Elections and the role of the European Parliament, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/387416
