EU STRUCTURE, EVOLUTION AND INST I TUTIONS Prof. dr. Tamara Ćapeta Prof. dr. Iris Goldner Lang

EU STRUCTURE, EU STRUCTURE, EVOLUTION AND EVOLUTION AND INSTINSTIITUTIONSTUTIONS

Prof. dr. Tamara ĆapetaProf. dr. Tamara ĆapetaProf. dr. Iris Goldner LangProf. dr. Iris Goldner Lang

Faculty of Law, University of ZagrebFaculty of Law, University of Zagreb

MOTIVES FOR EUROPEAN MOTIVES FOR EUROPEAN INTEGRATIONINTEGRATION

Peace and stability and desire to keep Germany Peace and stability and desire to keep Germany under control by its integration within Europeunder control by its integration within Europe

Creation of a single marketCreation of a single market Economic prosperityEconomic prosperity Independence in relation to new world powers Independence in relation to new world powers

(USA/USSR)(USA/USSR) New European democratic identity as opposed New European democratic identity as opposed

to totalitarism and nationalismto totalitarism and nationalism- Which motives stayed the same, which have - Which motives stayed the same, which have changes and which have been achieved?changes and which have been achieved?

CHURCCHURCHHILL’S SPEECH - ILL’S SPEECH - ZÜRICH, 1946ZÜRICH, 1946

““The first step in the re-creation of the The first step in the re-creation of the European family must be a partnership European family must be a partnership between France and Germany. In this way between France and Germany. In this way only can France recover the moral and only can France recover the moral and cultural leadership of Europe. There can be no cultural leadership of Europe. There can be no revival of Europe without a spiritually great revival of Europe without a spiritually great France and a spiritually great Germany. The France and a spiritually great Germany. The structure of the structure of the United States of Europe United States of Europe will be such as to make the material strength will be such as to make the material strength of a single State less important. Small nations of a single State less important. Small nations will count as much as large ones and gain will count as much as large ones and gain their honour by a contribution to the common their honour by a contribution to the common cause. cause.

SCHUMAN DECLARATION 9 SCHUMAN DECLARATION 9 MAY 1950MAY 1950

French foreign minister French foreign minister ““The pooling of coal and steel production The pooling of coal and steel production

should immediately provide for the should immediately provide for the setting up of common foundations for setting up of common foundations for economic development as a first step in economic development as a first step in the federation of Europe, and will change the federation of Europe, and will change the destinies of those regions which have the destinies of those regions which have long been devoted to the manufacture of long been devoted to the manufacture of munitions of war, of which they have munitions of war, of which they have been the most constant victims.”been the most constant victims.”

5/19504/1951 5/1952

7/1952

3/1953

8/1954

5/1955

kraj ´55početak ´57

potipisivanje3. 1957.

PotpisivanjeUgovora EZUČ

Ugovor o osnivanjuEuropskeobrambenezajednice (EOZ)

Sastavljen ug. oEuropskoj pol.zajednici (EPZ)

Propast UgovoraEOZ i EPZ

Konferencija uMessini: temeljnaodluka o osnivanjuEEZ i EURATOM-a

Njemačkapristupa NATO-uPariška konferencija:

Konačni dogovor ozajedničkom tržištu izajednici za at.energiju

Ugovor EZUČstupa na snagu

Schumannov plan

PotpisivanjeRimskihugovora(EEZ/Euratom)

Stupio nasnagu

1.1.1958.

FOUNDING TREATIESFOUNDING TREATIES

1951 1951 European Coal and Steel European Coal and Steel Community Community (expired in 2002)(expired in 2002)1957 1957 European Economic European Economic CommunityCommunity1957 1957 European Community for European Community for Atomic Energy (Euratom)Atomic Energy (Euratom)1992 1992 European UnionEuropean Union(Treaty of (Treaty of Maastricht)Maastricht)

AMENDING THE FOUNDING AMENDING THE FOUNDING TREATIESTREATIES

Intergovernmental Conference – Heads Intergovernmental Conference – Heads of States and Governments of EU of States and Governments of EU Member States decide on and sign Member States decide on and sign amendmentsamendments

Amendments enter into force only if Amendments enter into force only if ratified by all Member Statesratified by all Member States

Ratification Procedure – according to Ratification Procedure – according to Constitutions of respective Member Constitutions of respective Member StatesStates

AMENDING THE AMENDING THE FOUNDING TREATIESFOUNDING TREATIES

Single European ActSingle European Act, 1986 , 1986 – in force 1 July 1987in force 1 July 1987

MaastrichtMaastricht, 1992 , 1992 – in force 1. November 1993in force 1. November 1993

AmsterdamAmsterdam, 1997, 1997– in force 1 May 1999in force 1 May 1999

NiceNice, 2001 , 2001 - in force 1 February 2003- in force 1 February 2003

LisbonLisbon, 13 December 2007, 13 December 2007- in force 1 December 2009- in force 1 December 2009

EU ENLARGEMENT WAVES

19511951 Belgium, France, Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands,(ECSC)the Netherlands,(ECSC)(1957 EEC and EURATOM)(1957 EEC and EURATOM)

19731973 Denmark, Ireland and Denmark, Ireland and the UKthe UK

1981 1981 GreeceGreece 19861986 Portugal and SpainPortugal and Spain 19951995 Austria, Finland and Austria, Finland and

SwedenSweden 20042004 Cyprus , the Czech Cyprus , the Czech

Republic, Estonia, Latvia, Republic, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Poland, Slovenia, SlovakiaPoland, Slovenia, Slovakia

20072007 Bulgaria and Romania Bulgaria and Romania ??

PERIODS OF PROGRESS AND PERIODS OF PROGRESS AND CRISESCRISES

1950S – mid 1960s – beginning1950S – mid 1960s – beginning(ECSC (ECSC → abandonment of→ abandonment of EDC&EPC EDC&EPC → EEC and Euratom→ EEC and Euratom))

Mid 1960s – 1986 – crisisMid 1960s – 1986 – crisis(“Empty chair crisis” 1965 (“Empty chair crisis” 1965 → Luxembourg → Luxembourg compromise 1966 → Single European Act 1987)compromise 1966 → Single European Act 1987)

1986 – 1993 – success1986 – 1993 – success (Treaty of Maastrichta – creation of the EU)(Treaty of Maastrichta – creation of the EU)

1993 – 2005 – enlargement, consolidation1993 – 2005 – enlargement, consolidation 2005 – 2009 – consitutional/identity crisis2005 – 2009 – consitutional/identity crisis

(failure of Constiutional Treaty after the French and (failure of Constiutional Treaty after the French and Dutch referenda → Treaty of Lisabn 12 June 2008 Irish Dutch referenda → Treaty of Lisabn 12 June 2008 Irish “no” )“no” )

2009 - … - Treaty of Lisbon2009 - … - Treaty of Lisbon

TREATY ON THE CONSITUTION FOR TREATY ON THE CONSITUTION FOR EUROPE SIGNED ON 29 OCTOBER EUROPE SIGNED ON 29 OCTOBER

20042004

TREATY ON THE CONSTITUTION FOR TREATY ON THE CONSTITUTION FOR EUROPE REJECTED BY FRENCH EUROPE REJECTED BY FRENCH

CITIZENS ON 29 MAY 2005 AND BY CITIZENS ON 29 MAY 2005 AND BY DUTCH CITIZENS ON 1 JUNE 2005DUTCH CITIZENS ON 1 JUNE 2005

AFTER THE FAILURE OF THE AFTER THE FAILURE OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL TREATYCONSTITUTIONAL TREATY

31 December 2007 – Lisbon Treaty 31 December 2007 – Lisbon Treaty signed:signed:– Elimination from the text of state-like Elimination from the text of state-like

rhetoric: flag, hymn, certain terms, rhetoric: flag, hymn, certain terms, such as Minister of European Lawsuch as Minister of European Law

– Content, although differently Content, although differently organized, mostly unchangedorganized, mostly unchanged

– Old technique for amending Treaties, Old technique for amending Treaties, by amendments on amendments, usedby amendments on amendments, used

RESULT: RESULT: SAME CONTENT IN A LESS SAME CONTENT IN A LESS UNDERSTENDABLE PACKAGEUNDERSTENDABLE PACKAGE

Still, this enabled Still, this enabled Member States to Member States to ratify the ratify the LisbonTreaty LisbonTreaty without referendawithout referenda

All, but Ireland …All, but Ireland …

IRELAND: 12 JUNE 2008IRELAND: 12 JUNE 2008

IRISH “NO”IRISH “NO” It is not linked to unpopularity of the EU in

Ireland (Eurobarometer 69 June 2008 – 82% of Irish voters said their country had benefited from EU membership)

What about the functioning of institutions? – 42% of Irish “no” voters and 33% of “yes” voters thought that EU institutions would not be blocked

POSSIBLE OPTIONSPOSSIBLE OPTIONS1) Renegotiate Lisbon

Is there political will? Changing the text would require new ratifications

2) Abandon it3) Another Irish vote

CONCESSIONSCONCESSIONS

– 76% of Irish “no” voters and 38% of “yes” voters supported the view that the “no” vote would allow the Irish government to renegotiate “exceptions” within the Treatya) Commissioner for each MS (6% of “no” voters)Art. 17(5) EU: “As from 1 Nov. 2014, the Commission shall consist of a number of members, including its President and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, corresponding to two thirds of the number of Member States, unless the European Council, acting unanimously, decides to alter this number.” Status quo might go in favour of the power of the Commission but not efficiency

CONCESSIONSCONCESSIONSb) Irish military neutrality (6%)c) Protecting the tax system – low corporate-tax rates (6%)d) Gay marriages, abortion, euthanasia (2%)e) Avoiding an influx of immigrants (1%)

IRELAND: 2 OCTOBER 2009IRELAND: 2 OCTOBER 2009

67% YES VOTES67% YES VOTES

EUROPEAN UNION BEFORE EUROPEAN UNION BEFORE LISBONLISBON

EUEUinstitutionsinstitutions

Area of freedom, security and justice

EUROPEANCOMMUNITY

supranationalorganisation

ECSC (expired)EUROATOM

COMMON FOREIGN ANDSECURITY POLICY

(CFSP)

intergovernmentalcooperation

POLICE ANDJUDICIAL

COOPERATION INCRIMINAL MATTERS

(PJC)

Intergovernmentalcooperations

EUROPEAN COMMUNITYEUROPEAN COMMUNITY(I. pillar)(I. pillar)

– Free movement of goods, Free movement of goods, workers, services and workers, services and capitalcapital

– AgricultureAgriculture– Visas, asylum, migrationVisas, asylum, migration– transporttransport– Competition, taxation and Competition, taxation and

approximation of lawsapproximation of laws– Economic and monetary Economic and monetary

unionunion– EmploymentEmployment– Common commercial Common commercial

policypolicy– Customs cooperationCustoms cooperation

– Social policy, education, Social policy, education, vocational traiing and youthvocational traiing and youth

– CultureCulture– Public healthPublic health– Consumer protectionConsumer protection– Trans-Euroepan networksTrans-Euroepan networks– IndustryIndustry– Economic and social Economic and social

cohesioncohesion– Research and technological Research and technological

developmentdevelopment– EnvironmentEnvironment– Development cooperationsDevelopment cooperations

EuratomEuratom

COMMON FOREIGN AND COMMON FOREIGN AND SECURITY POLICYSECURITY POLICY

(II pillar)(II pillar) Foreign policyForeign policy

E.g.preserve peace, human rights, E.g.preserve peace, human rights, democracy, prevent conflicts and democracy, prevent conflicts and strengthen international security, strengthen international security, relations with third countriesrelations with third countries

Security policySecurity policy EU security,disarmament, financial EU security,disarmament, financial

aspects of defence, long-term security aspects of defence, long-term security measuresmeasures

POLICE AND JUDICIAL POLICE AND JUDICIAL COOPERATION IN COOPERATION IN

CRIMINAL MATTERS (III CRIMINAL MATTERS (III pillar)pillar)

Prevention and combating of racism and Prevention and combating of racism and xenophobiaxenophobia

Prevention and combating of crime, Prevention and combating of crime, especially terrorism, trafficing in human especially terrorism, trafficing in human beings, sbeings, sexual exploitation of women and exual exploitation of women and children, illicit drug trafficking, illicit arms children, illicit drug trafficking, illicit arms trafficking, money laundering, corruption, trafficking, money laundering, corruption, counterfeiting of means of payment, counterfeiting of means of payment, computer crime and organised crimecomputer crime and organised crime

EU LAW BEFORE LISBONEU LAW BEFORE LISBON European Community law (I pillar)European Community law (I pillar) II pillar lawII pillar law III pillar lawIII pillar law

CHARACTERISTICS OF CHARACTERISTICS OF EUROPEAN COMMUNITY EUROPEAN COMMUNITY

LAWLAW Transfer of sovereign powers of Member Transfer of sovereign powers of Member

States on the CommunityStates on the Community Legal system sui generisLegal system sui generis Direct effectDirect effect Supremacy of EC lawSupremacy of EC law

CHARACTERISTICS OFCHARACTERISTICS OFII PILLAR AND III PILLAR II PILLAR AND III PILLAR

LAWLAW Intergovernmental cooperationsIntergovernmental cooperations No direct effectNo direct effect No supremacy of EU lawNo supremacy of EU law Weaker power of EU institutionsWeaker power of EU institutions

TREATY STRUCTURETREATY STRUCTURENICE - LISBONNICE - LISBON

Treaty on European Treaty on European Union Union

Treaty on European Treaty on European CommunityCommunity

Treaty on European Treaty on European Energy CommunityEnergy Community

Treaty on European Treaty on European Union (TEU)Union (TEU)

Treaty on the Treaty on the Functioning of the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU)European Union (TFEU)

Treaty on European Treaty on European Energy CommunityEnergy Community

THE MOST IMPORTANT THE MOST IMPORTANT LISBON CHANGESLISBON CHANGES

EU Structure – elimination of EU Structure – elimination of pillars, disappearance of the ECpillars, disappearance of the EC

Clarification of the vertical Clarification of the vertical division of powersdivision of powers

Institutional changes Institutional changes Changes in Procedures and Changes in Procedures and

instruments of decision-makinginstruments of decision-making

EU Institutions

II I III

CFSP Former EC competences

+ PJC

EU ACCORDING TO EU ACCORDING TO LISBONLISBON

STRUCTURAL CHANGESSTRUCTURAL CHANGES First and third pillars merged, by First and third pillars merged, by

submitting third pillar to submitting third pillar to supranational methods as well supranational methods as well

EC does not exist any more EC does not exist any more (Euratom continues)(Euratom continues)

EU acquires legal personality and EU acquires legal personality and becomes subject in international becomes subject in international relationsrelations

NEED FOR INSTITUTIONAL REFORMNEED FOR INSTITUTIONAL REFORM Institutional deficiency

(Maastricht/Amsterdam/Nice)- Institutional reform needed to keep up with the EU’s deepening and widening- Improvement of: decision-making efficiency, EU representation, transparency/legitimacy and achievement of EU goals

Supranational vs. Intergovernmental method- Supranational representation Commission- Intergovernmental representation Council

EU INSTITUTIONSEU INSTITUTIONS European ParliamentEuropean Parliament Council (of the European Union)Council (of the European Union) European CommissionEuropean Commission Court of JusticeCourt of Justice of the European Union of the European Union Court of AuditorsCourt of Auditors European Council European Council (institution after Lison)(institution after Lison) Other bodies: Economic and Social Other bodies: Economic and Social

Committee, Committee of the Regions, Committee, Committee of the Regions, European Central Bank, European European Central Bank, European Investment BankInvestment Bank

Europol, Eurojust, agencies, etc.Europol, Eurojust, agencies, etc.

EUROPEAN EUROPEAN COMMISSIONCOMMISSION

I pillar - initator of the legislative processI pillar - initator of the legislative process II and III pillar – legislative initiative shared with MSsII and III pillar – legislative initiative shared with MSs Principal policy-maker in the EUPrincipal policy-maker in the EU Overseas the implementation of the EU law in Overseas the implementation of the EU law in

Member States (“guardian of the Treaties”)Member States (“guardian of the Treaties”) Politically responsible to the EPPolitically responsible to the EP 27 Commissioners27 Commissioners

EUROPEAN COMMISSION POST-EUROPEAN COMMISSION POST-LISBONLISBON

Promotes “the general interest of the Union” Driving force of EU integration (deepening &

widening) Exclusive right of legislative initiative legislative

proposal is in the general interest of the EU It can achieve these goals only by cooperating

with the EP and the MSs BUT:1) Does this challenge its independence 2) Would the Lisbon abandonment of the system of

one Commissioner per MS have reduced the power of the Commission and its President?

3) Does acting in the “general interest of the Union” require representation of each MS?

PRESIDENT OF THE EUROPEAN PRESIDENT OF THE EUROPEAN COMMISSIONCOMMISSION

Prominent role internally & externallyArt. 17(6)(b) TEU: “The President of the Commission shall decide on the internal organisation of the Commission, ensuring that it acts consistently, efficiently and as a collegiate body.” appoints Vice-Presidents and makes a member resign - Post-Lisbon slightly strengthened role – no College approval needed

Competing powers (post-Lisbon):1) President of the European Council2) High Representative

WHO WILLWHO WILLOBAMA CALL?OBAMA CALL? European President?European President?

European Commission European Commission President? President?

High Representative High Representative for Foreign and for Foreign and Security Policy? Security Policy?

? ? ?

COUNCIL OF COUNCIL OF MINISTERSMINISTERS

– Legislative institutionLegislative institution– Different formations – 1 representative from each Different formations – 1 representative from each

MS at ministerial level (e.g. GAC, ECOFIN)MS at ministerial level (e.g. GAC, ECOFIN)– Levels of decision-makingLevels of decision-making– MinisterialMinisterialCOREPER I and II COREPER I and II working groupsworking groups– Presided by the the rotating PresidencyPresided by the the rotating Presidency– Except: Council of Ministers of Foreign Affaies – Except: Council of Ministers of Foreign Affaies –

presided by the High Representative for Foreign presided by the High Representative for Foreign and Security Policyand Security Policy

– Decision-making: qualified majority (255 out of Decision-making: qualified majority (255 out of 345 + majority of MSs + 62% of population as a 345 + majority of MSs + 62% of population as a blocking mechanism), simple majority, blocking mechanism), simple majority, unanimouslyunanimously

EUROPEAN COUNCILEUROPEAN COUNCIL ““Summit”Summit”

– Defines general political directions and Defines general political directions and prioritiespriorities

– Heads of State or Government of MSs, Heads of State or Government of MSs, together with its President and the together with its President and the President of the Commission – post-Lisbon President of the Commission – post-Lisbon High Rep. takes part in its workHigh Rep. takes part in its work

– Meets at least 4 time a yearMeets at least 4 time a year– Post-Lisbon: rPost-Lisbon: recognized as an EU institutionecognized as an EU institution

PRESIDENT OF THE EUROPEAN PRESIDENT OF THE EUROPEAN COUNCILCOUNCIL

New function! Attributed to an individual for 2,5 year

Herman Van Rompuy

PRESIDENT OF THE EUROPEAN PRESIDENT OF THE EUROPEAN COUNCILCOUNCIL

Reaction to the weaknesses of the rotating six-months depersonalised Presidency of the Council

The Presidency of the Council/European Council was, at the start, intended mostly for internal purposes, but over the years it acquired a central role externally in CFSP

Post-Lisbon: Individual Presidency of the European Council remains contrasted to MSs’ Presidency of he Council

Role: chair meetings of the European Council; ensure its functioning; present a report to the EP; ensure external representation of the Union in CFSP at his/her level and in that capacity (15(6) TEU) Will the President of the European Council become the most prominent figure internally and externally? Is his external role competing with that of High Representative?

HIGH REPRESENTATIVE OF THE HIGH REPRESENTATIVE OF THE UNION FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS UNION FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS

AND SECURITY POLICYAND SECURITY POLICY Union Minister of Foreign Affairs (Constitution) Amsterdam: High Representative for CFSP

(18(3)EU) Catherine Ashton

HIGH REPRESENTATIVEHIGH REPRESENTATIVE Roles:

1) Presiding over the Foreign Affairs Council2) Commission Vice-President

Duties (Art. 18 TEU):1) Conducting the EU CFSP 2) Responsible for external relations in the Comm.3) Ensuring the consistency of EU external action

COMMISSION PRESIDENT VS.COMMISSION PRESIDENT VS.HIGH REPRESENTATIVEHIGH REPRESENTATIVE

High Representative Commission Vice-President Unlike other Vice-Presidents, not appointed by the Comm.

President but by the European Council In case of conflicting responsibilities, the Council role

prevails:Art. 18(4) TEU:“In exercising these responsibilities within the Commission, and only for these responsibilities, the High Representative shall be bound by Commission procedures to the extent that this is consistent with paragraphs 2 and 3.”

Abandoning of the previous independent Comm. initiative:Art. 30 TEU: “Any MS, the High Representative, or the High Representative with the Commission’s support, may refer any question relating to the common foreign and security policy to the Council and may submit to it initiatives or proposals …”

Commission loses?

COMMISSION PRESIDENT VS. COMMISSION PRESIDENT VS. PRESIDENT OF THE EUROPEAN PRESIDENT OF THE EUROPEAN

COUNCILCOUNCIL Verhofstadt (College of Europe, 18 Nov. 2002):

“Can one person express consensus of Europe when Europe rather seldom reaches consensus on burning international issues?... Presidentialism of the EU does not seem to me an appropriate option for Europe’s future institutional structure.”

Prodi (EP, 5 Dec. 2002): “Such a position would open a rift in our institutional structure.”

The influence of the President of the European Council largely depends on the individual holding the position

Commission loses

EUROPEAN EUROPEAN PARLIAMENTPARLIAMENT

Legislative institutionLegislative institution 736 MEPs (max. 751)736 MEPs (max. 751) Minimum 6, maximum 96 per MSMinimum 6, maximum 96 per MS Direct elections every 5 years; number of Direct elections every 5 years; number of

MEPs distributed according to national MEPs distributed according to national quotasquotas

Last elections: June 2009Last elections: June 2009 Croatia will have 12 MEPsCroatia will have 12 MEPs

EUROPEAN EUROPEAN PARLIAMENTPARLIAMENT

MEPs grouped according to political affiliation, MEPs grouped according to political affiliation, not nationalnot national

Largest party: EPP, followed by S&D; Greens …Largest party: EPP, followed by S&D; Greens … Eurosceptics also represented Eurosceptics also represented

(EFD – 32)(EFD – 32) President: President: Martin SchulzMartin Schulz

CONCLUSIONCONCLUSION Why do we need institutional changes & are they good?

The Treaty of Lisbon - institutional improvements?1) Further integration (deepening and widening)2) Decision-making efficiency EU efficiency in general3) Transparency & democracy EU legitimacy4) Union representation President of the European Council, High Representative or Commission President?

Any institutional change might change the institutional balance + balance among MSs – to whose advantage?1) Commission supranational/integration interests2) Council/MSs intergovernmental/national interests3) EP more transparency and democracy, but not necessarily more efficiency in decision-making