5. Legislation and Decision-Making

Author(s):  
Paul Craig ◽  
Gráinne de Búrca

All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing able students with a stand-alone resource. This chapter, which discusses the process by which the EU enacts legislation and makes decisions, begins by considering the making of legislative acts. This includes the Treaty rules and practice concerning the initiation of the legislative process, and how the ordinary legislative procedure, in which the Council and EP act as co-legislators, has come to occupy centre stage. The focus then shifts to the making of delegated acts followed by an analysis of how implementing acts are made. The chapter concludes with discussion of democracy in the EU, and evaluates the extent to which the EU might be said to have a democracy deficit.

EU Law ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 155-193
Author(s):  
Paul Craig ◽  
Gráinne de Búrca

All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing students with a stand-alone resource. This chapter, which discusses the process by which the EU enacts legislation and makes decisions, begins by considering the making of legislative acts. This includes the Treaty rules and practice concerning the initiation of the legislative process, and how the ordinary legislative procedure, in which the Council and EP act as co-legislators, has come to occupy centre stage. The focus then shifts to the making of delegated acts followed by an analysis of how implementing acts are made. The chapter concludes with discussion of democracy in the EU, and evaluates the extent to which the EU might be said to have a democracy deficit. The UK version contains a further section analysing issues concerning EU legislation and decision-making in relation to the UK post-Brexit.


EU Law ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 162-201
Author(s):  
Paul Craig ◽  
Gráinne de Búrca

All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing students with a stand-alone resource. This chapter, which discusses the process by which the EU enacts legislation and makes decisions, begins by considering the making of legislative acts. This includes the Treaty rules and practice concerning the initiation of the legislative process, and how the ordinary legislative procedure, in which the Council and EP act as co-legislators, has come to occupy centre stage. The focus then shifts to the making of delegated acts followed by an analysis of how implementing acts are made. The chapter concludes with discussion of democracy in the EU, and evaluates the extent to which the EU might be said to have a democracy deficit. The UK version contains a further section analysing issues concerning EU legislation and decision-making in relation to the UK post-Brexit.


Author(s):  
Maja Kluger Dionigi ◽  
Anne Rasmussen

The ordinary legislative procedure (OLP), previously known as co-decision, has marked a significant milestone in the development of the European Union (EU) and transformed the way its institutions interact. What was initially seen as a cumbersome decision-making procedure subject to considerable criticism ended up being quite successful. The workings of the OLP have gradually developed, including both informal and formal rule changes to ensure a smoother functioning of the procedure. While the EU Council is still seen as the strongest body in the interinstitutional balance, the European Parliament (EP) is a co-legislator in most policy areas. After introducing the option to conclude legislation at first reading, so-called early agreements have become the norm in the OLP. The increase in early agreements by means of trilogues has speeded up decision-making but has not come without costs. Concerns have been raised about the transparency of trilogues and the accountability of the actors involved. Not surprisingly, these concerns have led to a shift in the research of the OLP from an emphasis on the powers of the different EU institutions to early agreements and their consequences for democratic legitimacy. Our careful review of the EU institutions’ own rules and practices governing trilogue negotiations shows that the rules and procedures for the conduct of negotiations have been adapted significantly over time. While there is a continued need for the EU to keep enforcing openness in its procedures, OLP interinstitutional bargaining does not operate in a rule-free environment. Yet most democratic scrutiny has been directed at the internal decision-making processes in the EP rather than at maximizing openness on the Council side or with respect to input from interest groups in the negotiation processes.


2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 24
Author(s):  
Ani Matei ◽  
Adrian Stelian Dumitru

Subsidiarity constitutes a guiding principle of the EU exercising power and the idea of involving national parliaments in the EU legislative procedure was seen as the best solution to increase democracy and transparency of the EU decision-making process at the European Convention established in 2001. Such a mechanism enables national parliaments to ensure the correct application of the principle of subsidiarity by the institutions taking part in the legislative process. This article examines how this principle is implemented by the national parliaments and EU responsible institutions. What is the novelty derived from the Treaty of Lisbon? Do national parliaments participate actively in the implementation of subsidiarity? If yes, what are the tools at their disposal? To answer all of these questions we try to shape a framework for understanding the phenomenon.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 49
Author(s):  
Michela Giordano ◽  
Antonio Piga

The ongoing Pan-European integration process has profoundly influenced the nature of European law and its development, demanding a review of “the ways of how language […] is materialized” (Gibová, 2009, p. 192). EU multilingualism is thus becoming an intricate concept since “EU translation is […] becoming the language of Europe” (Gibová, 2009, p. 192) encompassing a supranational view of the world conveyed in EU-wide legislation. Very much in line with this assumption, and taking into account the teaching experience in Specialised Translation Masters’ courses training would-be professional translators, this study examines a corpus of European Parliament Regulations on immigration. In order to understand whether dissimilarities and/or congruencies occur between the EU working language, i.e., English, and the Italian versions, the metadiscourse framework by Hyland (2005), comprising both interactive and interactional features, is used as the point of departure for the analysis of parallel texts. The Regulations produced by EU institutions and conveyed and transmitted both in English as a “procedural language” (Wagner, Bech, & Martίnez, 2012) as well as in Italian have been scrutinized both quantitatively and qualitatively, in order to draw precious pedagogical implications for translation studies and professional practice for future qualified and trained translators.


2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-15
Author(s):  
Mihaela Pătrăuș ◽  
Darius-Dennis Pătrăuș

The Lisbon Treaty in order to strengthen the EU's capacity to decide, to act and to ensure the legitimacy of decisions taken at the same time, reformed the decision-making process of the EU, particularly by changing the legislative procedures in force.Among the novelties of the Lisbon Treaty, we must mention the passerelle clauses, which according to the ordinary legislative procedure will be generalized, under certain conditions, in areas which were initially outside its scope.The treaty nominates two types of passerelle clauses: the general passerelle clause which applies to all European policies and the enabling of this clause will be authorized by a decision of the European Council, acting unanimously; the passerelle clauses specific to certain European policies (MFF, Common Security and Defence Policy, judicial cooperation regarding the family rights- this specific clause is the only one explaining which national parliaments keep their right to oppose; cooperation is strengthened in the areas governed by unanimity or by a special legislative procedure, social affairs, environmental ).The flexibility introduced through a significant number of passerelle clauses in the Lisbon Treaty allows adjustment of the EU quickly and efficiently, depending on punctual developments, without neglecting the guarantees on the sovereignty of member states.


2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 489-508
Author(s):  
Robert Böttner

The Treaty of Lisbon introduced general and special passerelle or bridging clauses into primary law. They can be used to alter voting arrangements from unanimity to qualified majority in the Council or from a special to the ordinary legislative procedure. This is to enable a shift to more supranational decision-making without the need for a full-fledged treaty revision. The European Parliament called on the European Council and the Council to make use of the passerelle clauses, also to involve Parliament as a co-legislator under the ordinary legislative procedure. The former Commission had started a discussion on the use of the passerelle clauses in four policy areas and it appears that the incumbent Commission President has endorsed this ambitious project. This article aims to explore the potential and the shortcomings of the bridging clauses as part of the unused potential of the Lisbon Treaty and discusses the enhanced cooperation procedure as a possible alternative.


2020 ◽  
pp. 77-88
Author(s):  
Nikolay Kaveshnikov ◽  

The article explores the evolution of decision-making procedures and their use in the EU as one of the parameters of integration depth. The study used a database of secondary legislation covering 1990-2019. The final empirical data consists of 5,427 documents, including 1,272 directives and 4,155 regulations. The research empirically confirmed the increase in the frequency of procedures application that envisage a more active participation of the European Parliament in the legislative process. At the same time, the authorreveals that a significant part of secondary legislation is still adopted by the Council without the EPinvolvement. An important difference in the use of adaptation procedures of directives and regulations has been identified; working hypotheses about the reasons for such differences have been formulated.


Author(s):  
Stoyko O. М.

The evolution of the referendum institutionalization in the constitutions of the EU states is considered. The peculiarities of its initiation, realization and implementation of results in the "old" and "new" members of the Union are highlighted and analyzed. It is concluded that young democracies are pioneering in using this tool of direct democracy both to legitimize government decisions and to involve citizens in the decision-making process. The history of the introduction of plebiscites into the practice of political processes in European countries shows, that they are closely linked to democratic transit: the later the constitution is adopted, the more opportunities for citizens to use referendums not only to control the legislative process in parliament (support or veto certain decisions, draft laws), but also to formulate an agenda - to propose their own initiatives for consideration by public authorities. Accordingly, there are obvious differences between the referendum practices of the "old" and "new" members of the European Union, since the latter are much more active in using them and give citizens real leverage on public policy by holding plebiscites on popular initiatives.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document