Now, in January 2002, a visible step in European integration has been accomplished. With the introduction of the European €-currency about 296,8 millions citizen1 of the European Union (EU) will hold the new symbols of unity of Europe’s peoples in their hands. What began with an attempt of reconciliation and co-operation via the ECSC in 1952 has now developed towards a so far unprecedented transfer of sovereign rights and competence from nation states to a supranational/intergovernmental organisation. However, throughout the EU prevail doubts concerning the deeper mechanism of policy making. Despite certain inscrutability and the mysterious nature of decision making there are demands for more democracy in the Union. On the other side it may be assumed that most of the European citizen do not really take notice of high and low politics decided upon in the European institutions. Aim of this paper shall therefor be a closer elaboration of the policy making process in the European Union, the enforcement of decisions on European and national level, and finally influences or interdependencies from outside the formal institution, interfering in Europe’s policy and polity. Hence, the results of the Nice IGC are not ratified yet – which might not be assumed soon – I focus on the binding regulations of the Amsterdam Treaty2. After a short description of the – as I would prefer to name it – macro level (Commission, Council, Parliament, Courts), where provisions are concluded, the implementation of this policies and decisions on the micro/national level shall be explained thereafter. Finally outside impetus (lobbying, national interests, etc.) on the decision and interpretation process shall be elaborated in a limited scope as well.
[...]
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Policy Making in the European Union
2.1 Legal Foundation of the European Union
2.1.1 Competence and Limited Power
2.1.2 Implied Powers
2.2 Primary and Secondary Sources of EU Law
2.2.1 Regulations
2.2.2 Directives
2.2.3 Decisions
2.2.4 Sui Generis Acts, Soft Law and Case Law
2.3 European Union Institutions
2.3.1 Commission
2.3.2 Council
2.3.3 Parliament
2.3.4 Court
2.4 Others
2.4.1 Member States and National Interests
2.4.2 Interest Groups and Lobbying
3. Implementation of EU Policy
3.1 Enforcement of EU Law regarding Article 10 TEC
3.2 Enforcement of EU Law regarding Articles 226–228 TEC
3.3 Sanctions
3.4 Non-compliance and Reciprocity
4. Conclusion
Objectives and Research Themes
This paper examines the constitutional and procedural mechanisms of policy-making within the European Union. It addresses how EU institutions formulate policies, how those decisions are enforced at both the European and national levels, and the extent to which external factors such as national interests and lobbying influence this governance process.
- Legal foundations and the "sui generis" structure of the EU.
- Roles and institutional dynamics of the Commission, Council, Parliament, and Court of Justice.
- Mechanisms for the enforcement of EU law and the role of national administrations.
- Challenges of non-compliance, sanctions, and reciprocity within the Union.
- The impact of interest groups and lobbying on legislative policy-making.
Excerpt from the Book
2.1.1 Competence and Limited Power
Article 1 TEU provides that decisions of the EU have to be taken “as closely as possible to the citizen”. This refers to the principle of subsidiarity, which became leading principle of the EU, in Article 2 TEU, extending the Article 5 TEC provision to all fields of policy of the EU. However, the EU Treaties do not grasp subsidiarity by its definition.
Article 5 TEC defines the principle to such an extent that higher authorities should act “only if and insofar as the objectives of the proposed action cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States and can therefore, by reason of the scale or effects of the proposed action, be better achieved by the Community”. Yet, notions of subsidiarity may already be found in times of Aristoteles. Subsidiarity is far more than sheer decentralisation. Especially the provision in the EU Treaties is rather a rational argument concerning politics.
A pure definition in contrast to the EU/EC provision demands actions or institutional acts carried out on the lower institutional level. Only in the case, that the inferior unit – though having an advantage in regard to information on the particular problem – is by its resources and abilities not able to overcome the problem, the superior institution may intervene. Instead of interventionist behaviour, pure subsidiarity requires restrains on governmental influences, personal responsibility, and the free spread of potentials. In contrast to Article 5 TEC, there is no trace of a term ‘better’. Accordingly, it may be assumed that all actions could be carried out ‘better’ by the superior institutions of the EU, since it has a much larger budget and other resources at its disposal.
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: Outlines the scope of the paper regarding the development of European integration and the decision-making mechanisms within EU institutions.
2. Policy Making in the European Union: Discusses the constitutional foundations of the EU, focusing on legal competencies, implied powers, and the roles of specific institutions.
3. Implementation of EU Policy: Analyzes the enforcement procedures of EU law, focusing on Article 10 and 226-228 TEC, as well as the challenges of non-compliance.
4. Conclusion: Synthesizes the findings by using the metaphor of a pendulum to describe the shifting balance of influence between national and European poles.
Keywords
European Union, Policy Making, Subsidiarity, European Commission, European Parliament, Council, European Court of Justice, EU Law, Implementation, Enforcement, Lobbying, Integration, Sui Generis, Treaty of Amsterdam, Competence.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core subject of this research paper?
The paper focuses on the decision-making processes and policy implementation mechanisms within the European Union, analyzing how institutions and law shape European integration.
Which primary themes are addressed in this study?
The central themes include the constitutional framework of the EU, institutional dynamics, legislative enforcement, and the influence of national interests and lobbying.
What is the main objective of the author?
The objective is to elaborate on how policies are concluded at the macro-level (EU institutions) and subsequently implemented at the micro-level (Member States).
Which scientific methodology is applied?
The author employs a legal-institutional analysis, relying on primary treaty texts, case law, and established scholarly literature to explain governance in the EU.
What does the main body of the paper cover?
It covers the constitutional foundations, the legal nature of EU acts (regulations, directives), the specific powers of EU bodies, and the procedural enforcement of community law.
Which keywords define this work?
Key terms include European Union, Policy Making, Subsidiarity, EU Law, and Institutional Competencies.
How does the Commission exercise its power?
The Commission acts as the motor of integration by initiating legislation, guarding the Treaties, and managing the EU budget, despite its limited executive autonomy.
What is the significance of the "pendulum" metaphor in the conclusion?
The pendulum metaphor illustrates the dynamic and often shifting balance of political and decision-making power between national Member States and the European supranational pole.
- Quote paper
- Heiko Bubholz (Author), 2002, Policy Making in the European Union - Policy Making and Implementation, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/5548
