DOCSLIB.ORG

Governance by Committee: the Role of Committees in European Policy Making and Policy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Governance by Committee: the Role of Committees in European Policy Making and Policy Governance by Committee: The Role of Committees in European Policy Making and Policy Research Paper 00/GHA Return to Introduction STATE OF THE ART REPORT CONTRACT NUMBER: HPSE-CT-1999-00019 PROJECT NUMBER: SERD-1999-00128 TITLE: GOVERNANCE BY COMMITTEE, THE ROLE OF COMMITTEES IN EUROPEAN POLICY-MAKING AND POLICY IMPLEMENTATION MAASTRICHT, MAY 2000 Table of Contents 1. General Introduction ................................................................................................................ 4 Subproject 1: The Standing Committees in the European Parliament 2.1..................Introduction ............................................................................................................... 6 2.2..................The Evolution of the European Parliament: From Consultative ............................... 6 Assembly to Co-legislator 2.2.1...............The EP as a Legislative Actor after Maastricht......................................................... 7 2.2.2...............EP and Council on an Even Footing after Amsterdam.............................................. 8 2.2.2.1. ..........The Streamlining of the Co-decision Procedure........................................................ 9 2.3..................The Role of EP Committees in the Legislative Process ............................................ 10 2.3.1...............Membership in EP Committees.................................................................................12 2.3.2...............Powers and Competences of EP Committees............................................................ 13 2.3.2.1............Case Studies on EP Committees................................................................................15 2.3.3...............Effect of the Co-decision Procedure on the Work..................................................... 16 of the EP Standing Committees 2.4..................The Role of EP Committees in Implementation........................................................ 17 2.5..................Approach, Questions and Methodology .................................................................... 19 2.5.1...............Major Research Questions......................................................................................... 19 2.5.1.1............Draft Interview and Documentary Analysis Guide ................................................... 21 2.6..................Bibliography .............................................................................................................. 22 3. Subproject 2: Committees and Working Parties in the Council 3.1..................Introduction ............................................................................................................... 26 3.2..................Existing Knowledge about the Working Groups....................................................... 26 3.2.1...............Knowledge of other EU Committees......................................................................... 27 3.2.2...............Knowledge about the Council as a Whole................................................................. 28 3.3..................What can General Approaches to EU Decision-Making lead us to........................... 28 hypothesize about Working Groups? 3.3.1...............Intergovernmentalism: Working Groups as Fora for National Delegates................. 29 3.3.2...............Neofunctionalism: Working Groups as Vectors of Transnationalism....................... 29 3.3.3...............Policy-Making or Governance: Working Groups as Arenas of ................................ 30 Interdependence 3.3.4...............Neo-Institutionalism: Working Groups as Rule-Bound Institutions ......................... 31 3.3.5...............Constructivism: Working Groups as Shapers of "European Problems".................... 31 3.4..................Our Approach, Questions and Methodology............................................................. 32 3.4.1...............A Set of Competing Hypotheses ...............................................................................32 3.4.2...............Research Methods, Case Studies and Interview Guide ............................................. 33 3.5..................Bibliography .............................................................................................................. 36 © EIPA May 2000 ii 4. Subproject 3: Policy Implementation and Comitology Committees 4.1..................Introduction ............................................................................................................... 41 4.2..................Objectives and Research Questions........................................................................... 43 4.3..................Theoretical approach to distinguish between Legislative.......................................... 44 and Implementing Powers 4.3.1...............The “EC Version” of the Principle of Separation of Powers: Art. 7 EC................... 44 Treaty 4.3.2...............The Hierarchy of Norms in EC law........................................................................... 45 (Primary Law, Basic Acts and Implementing Acts) 4.3.2.1............Legal Framework....................................................................................................... 45 4.3.2.1.1.........Basic Acts .................................................................................................................. 46 4.3.2.1.2.........Implementing Acts .................................................................................................... 46 4.3.2.2............Allocation of Law-making Powers in the Member States......................................... 47 4.3.2.3............Theoretical Considerations ........................................................................................ 47 4.3.2.3.1.........The role of Basic Acts and Implementing Acts in a Legal System........................... 47 4.3.2.3.2.........Justification for the Allocation of Law-making Powers............................................ 48 4.3.2.3.3.........Control over the Implementing Act by the Basic Act ............................................... 49 4.3.3...............The Role of the European Court of Justice................................................................ 49 4.3.3.1............The Enforcement of the Hierarchy of Norms by the European Court of ................. 49 Justice: Case C-159/96, Portugal v. Commission, [1998] ECR I-7379 as an example 4.3.3.1.1.........Introduction ............................................................................................................... 49 4.3.3.1.2.........Legal Background of the Case................................................................................... 50 4.3.3.1.3.........The Facts of the Case................................................................................................. 51 4.3.3.1.4.........The Judgment of the European Court of Justice........................................................ 51 4.3.3.1.4.1......General Principles...................................................................................................... 51 4.3.3.1.4.2......Art. 12 of Regulation 3030/93................................................................................... 52 4.3.3.1.4.3......Art. 8 of Regulation 3030/93..................................................................................... 52 4.3.3.1.4.4......Annullation of the Commission Decision ................................................................. 53 4.3.3.2............Allocation of Powers between Basic Acts and Implementing Acts .......................... 53 by the Court 4.3.3.3............Definition of “Legislative” Act by the Court ............................................................ 53 4.4..................Conclusion: Checklist................................................................................................ 54 Annex 1 .........Methodology of Subproject 3a)................................................................................. 55 Annex 2 .........Methodology of Subproject 3b)................................................................................. 57 4.5..................Bibliography .............................................................................................................. 59 © EIPA May 2000 iii 5. Subproject 4: The Committee System, Legitimacy, Citizen’s perceptions and Acceptance of the EU-system of Governance 5.1.1...............Introduction ............................................................................................................... 63 5.1.2...............The Traditional Way of Understanding Political Legitimacy ................................... 63 5.1.3...............Common Organisational Features of Democratic Regimes ...................................... 65 5.1.4...............Contemporary Democratic Governments.................................................................. 67 5.1.4.1............Power Sharing Systems ............................................................................................. 68 5.1.4.2............Different Types of Political Legitimacy.................................................................... 68 5.1.4.3............Divided Government ................................................................................................. 69 5.1.5...............The Parliament and the Executive ............................................................................. 70 5.1.5.1............Interdependency........................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Official Journal C 244 of the European Union
    Official Journal C 244 of the European Union Volume 59 English edition Information and Notices 5 July 2016 Contents II Information INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES European Commission 2016/C 244/01 Communication from the Commission amending the Annex to the Communication to the Member States on the application of Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to short-term export-credit insurance ............................................................................. 1 IV Notices NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES European Commission 2016/C 244/02 Euro exchange rates .............................................................................................................. 3 2016/C 244/03 Commission notice on the customs enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights concerning goods brought into the customs territory of the Union without being released for free circulation including goods in transit .................................................................................................................... 4 2016/C 244/04 Commission notice concerning the date of application of the Regional Convention on pan-Euro- Mediterranean preferential rules of origin or the protocols on rules of origin providing for diagonal cumulation between the Contracting Parties to this Convention .................................................... 10 EN NOTICES FROM MEMBER STATES 2016/C 244/05 United Kingdom Government notice concerning
    [Show full text]
  • Reports of Cases
    Report s of C ases OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERAL BOBEK delivered on 17 March 2016 1 Case C-592/14 European Federation for Cosmetic Ingredients v Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills (Request for a preliminary ruling from the High Court of Justice of England & Wales, Queen’s Bench Division (Administrative Court)(United Kingdom)) (Request for a preliminary ruling — Internal market — Regulation No 1223/2009 — Article 18(1)(b) — Cosmetic products — Cosmetic ingredients — Ban on the marketing of cosmetic ingredients having been tested on animals)) Table of contents I – Introduction ................................................................................... 2 II – Legal framework ............................................................................... 3 A – EU law .................................................................................. 3 B – National law ............................................................................. 4 C – WTO law ............................................................................... 4 III – Facts, procedure and questions referred ......................................................... 5 IV – Assessment .................................................................................... 6 A – Preliminary considerations ................................................................ 6 B – Analysis of Article 18(1)(b) ............................................................... 7 1. Introduction ........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • City Research Online
    City Research Online City, University of London Institutional Repository Citation: McDonagh, L. and Mimler, M. (2017). Intellectual Property Law and Brexit: A Retreat or a Reaffirmation of Jurisdiction? In: Dougan, M. (Ed.), The UK after Brexit. (pp. 159-179). Cambridge, UK: Intersentia. ISBN 1780684711 This is the accepted version of the paper. This version of the publication may differ from the final published version. Permanent repository link: https://openaccess.city.ac.uk/id/eprint/17634/ Link to published version: Copyright: City Research Online aims to make research outputs of City, University of London available to a wider audience. Copyright and Moral Rights remain with the author(s) and/or copyright holders. URLs from City Research Online may be freely distributed and linked to. Reuse: Copies of full items can be used for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge. Provided that the authors, title and full bibliographic details are credited, a hyperlink and/or URL is given for the original metadata page and the content is not changed in any way. City Research Online: http://openaccess.city.ac.uk/ [email protected] CHAPTER 8 INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW AND BREXIT: A RETREAT OR A REAFFIRMATION OF JURISDICTION? Luke McDonagh and Marc Mimler* Intellectual Property Law and Brexit 1. INTRODUCTION The effect of European Union law on intellectual property (IP) law in the United Kingdom has been profound. There is no area of IP law that does not feature EU legislation or CJEU case law. In fact, it may be the most ‘Europeanised’ area of private law.1 For this reason, ‘Brexit’ will undoubtedly have a massive impact on the current IP framework in the UK.
    [Show full text]
  • Managing Meritocracy in Clientelistic Democracies∗
    Managing Meritocracy in Clientelistic Democracies∗ Sarah Brierleyy Washington University in St Louis May 8, 2018 Abstract Competitive recruitment for certain public-sector positions can co-exist with partisan hiring for others. Menial positions are valuable for sustaining party machines. Manipulating profes- sional positions, on the other hand, can undermine the functioning of the state. Accordingly, politicians will interfere in hiring partisans to menial position but select professional bureau- crats on meritocratic criteria. I test my argument using novel bureaucrat-level data from Ghana (N=18,778) and leverage an exogenous change in the governing party to investigate hiring pat- terns. The results suggest that partisan bias is confined to menial jobs. The findings shed light on the mixed findings regarding the effect of electoral competition on patronage; competition may dissuade politicians from interfering in hiring to top-rank positions while encouraging them to recruit partisans to lower-ranked positions [123 words]. ∗I thank Brian Crisp, Stefano Fiorin, Barbara Geddes, Mai Hassan, George Ofosu, Dan Posner, Margit Tavits, Mike Thies and Daniel Triesman, as well as participants at the African Studies Association Annual Conference (2017) for their comments. I also thank Gangyi Sun for excellent research assistance. yAssistant Professor, Department of Political Science, Washington University in St. Louis. Email: [email protected]. 1 Whether civil servants are hired by merit or on partisan criteria has broad implications for state capacity and the overall health of democracy (O’Dwyer, 2006; Grzymala-Busse, 2007; Geddes, 1994). When politicians exchange jobs with partisans, then these jobs may not be essential to the running of the state.
    [Show full text]
  • Repression, Human Rights, and US Training of Military Forces from the South
    Repression, Human Rights, and US Training of Military Forces from the South Ruth Joanna Blakeley A Dissertation Submitted to the University of Bristol in Accordance with the Requirements of the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) in the Faculty of Law and Social Sciences, Department of Politics, October 2006 Word Count: 79,781 ABSTRACT In order to understand whether US training of military forces from the South has resulted in the use of repression or improvements in human rights, we need to situate the training within the broader context of US foreign policy objectives and strategies. The main aims of US foreign policy are to maintain its dominant global position and to ensure control of resources and markets in the South. These objectives are being pursued through an emerging, US- led transnational state, using the instruments of legitimation at least as much as repression. This contrasts with the Cold War, during which US foreign policy strategy towards the South emphasised repression. US training of military forces from the South during the Cold War played a key role in a US-led network of terror, through which many states in the South were connected to the US and each other by cooperation between their militaries, police and intelligence services. The training was dominated by a particular form of counterinsurgency instruction which advocated repression of groups that might potentially threaten US control of Southern economies and assets. This contributed to widespread human rights violations, particularly in Latin America. Following the end of the Cold War, reliance on the network of terror diminished, and it was subsumed within the emergent transnational state.
    [Show full text]
  • Eucrim 1/2016
    eucrim 2016 /1 THE EUROPEAN CRIMINAL LAW ASSOCIATIONS‘ FORUM Focus: Procedural Rights and Cooperation – New Tendencies Dossier particulier: Droits procéduraux et coopération – nouvelles tendances Schwerpunktthema: Verfahrensgarantien und Zusammenarbeit – neue Tendenzen The Directive on the Presumption of Innocence and the Right to Be Present at Trial Steven Cras and Anže Erbežnik The Directive on the Presumption of Innocence. A Missed Opportunity for Legal Persons? Stijn Lamberigts Inaudito reo Proceedings, Defence Rights, and Harmonisation Goals in the EU Prof. Dr. Stefano Ruggeri Paving the Way for Improved Mutual Assistance in the Context of Customs Fraud Emilia Porebska Können die Regelungen über die Zusammenarbeit der EU-Mitgliedstaaten bei der Strafverfolgung kurzerhand aufgehoben werden? Ulrich Schulz Vollstreckungshilfe zwischen Deutschland und Taiwan auf neuer Grundlage Dr. Ralf Riegel and Dr. Franca Fülle 2016 / 1 ISSUE / ÉDITION / AUSGABE The Associations for European Criminal Law and the Protection of Financial Interests of the EU is a network of academics and practitioners. The aim of this cooperation is to develop a European criminal law which both respects civil liberties and at the same time protects European citizens and the European institutions effectively. Joint seminars, joint research projects and annual meetings of the associations’ presidents are organised to achieve this aim. Contents News* Articles European Union Procedural Rights and Cooperation – New Tendencies Foundations Procedural Criminal Law 25 The Directive on the Presumption of 2 Fundamental Rights 13 Procedural Safeguards Innocence and the Right to Be Present at 2 Area of Freedom, Security 13 Data Protection Trial. Genesis and Description of the New and Justice 15 Ne bis in idem EU-Measure 3 Schengen Steven Cras and Anže Erbežnik Cooperation 36 The Directive on the Presumption of In- Institutions 16 European Arrest Warrant nocence.
    [Show full text]
  • Determinants and Consequences of Bureaucrat Effectiveness: Evidence
    Determinants and Consequences of Bureaucrat Effectiveness: Evidence from the Indian Administrative Service∗ Marianne Bertrand, Robin Burgess, Arunish Chawla and Guo Xu† October 21, 2015 Abstract Do bureaucrats matter? This paper studies high ranking bureaucrats in India to examine what determines their effectiveness and whether effective- ness affects state-level outcomes. Combining rich administrative data from the Indian Administrative Service (IAS) with a unique stakeholder survey on the effectiveness of IAS officers, we (i) document correlates of individual bureaucrat effectiveness, (ii) identify the extent to which rigid seniority-based promotion and exit rules affect effectiveness, and (iii) quantify the impact of this rigidity on state-level performance. Our empirical strategy exploits variation in cohort sizes and age at entry induced by the rule-based assignment of IAS officers across states as a source of differential promotion incentives. JEL classifica- tion: H11, D73, J38, M1, O20 ∗This project represents a colloboration between the Lal Bahadur Shastri National Academy of Administration (LBSNAA), the University of Chicago and London School of Economics. We are grateful to Padamvir Singh, the former Director of LBSNAA for his help with getting this project started. The paper has benefited from seminar/conference presentations at Berkeley, Bocconi, CEPR Public Economics Conference, IGC Political Economy Conference, LBSNAA, LSE, NBER India Conference, Stanford and Stockholm University. †Marianne Bertrand [University of Chicago Booth School of Business: Mari- [email protected]]; Robin Burgess [London School of Economics (LSE) and the International Growth Centre (IGC): [email protected]]; Arunish Chawla [Indian Administrative Service (IAS)]; Guo Xu [London School of Economics (LSE): [email protected]] 1 1 Introduction Bureaucrats are a core element of state capacity.
    [Show full text]
  • EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 16.12.2019 COM(2019)
    EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 16.12.2019 COM(2019) 638 final REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION ON THE WORKING OF COMMITTEES DURING 2018 {SWD(2019) 441 final} EN EN REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION ON THE WORKING OF COMMITTEES DURING 2018 In accordance with Article 10(2) of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers1 (the ‘Comitology Regulation’), the Commission hereby presents the annual report on the working of committees for 2018. This report gives an overview of developments in the comitology system in 2018 and a summary of the committees’ activities. It is accompanied by a staff working document containing detailed statistics on the work of the individual committees. 1. OVERVIEW OF DEVELOPMENTS IN THE COMITOLOGY SYSTEM IN 2018 1.1. General development As described in the 2013 annnual report2, all comitology procedures provided for in the ‘old’ Comitology Decision3, with the exception of the regulatory procedure with scrutiny, were automatically adapted to the new comitology procedures provided for in the Comitology Regulation. In 2018, the comitology committees were therefore operating under the procedures set out in the Comitology Regulation, i.e. advisory (Article 4) and examination (Article 5), as well as under the regulatory procedure with scrutiny set out in Article 5a of the Comitology Decision. The Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making of 13 April 20164 recalls, in its point 27, the need to align the regulatory procedure with scrutiny: ‘The three institutions acknowledge the need for the alignment of all existing legislation to the legal framework introduced by the Lisbon Treaty, and in particular the need to give high priority to the prompt alignment of all basic acts which still refer to the regulatory procedure with scrutiny.
    [Show full text]
  • Litigious Paranoia: Sense of Justice, Bureaucracy, and Media
    ADMINISTORY ZEITSCHRIFT FÜR VERWALTUNGSGESCHICHTE BAND 3, 2018 SEITE 201–217 D O I : 10.2478/ADHI-2018-0037 Litigious Paranoia: Sense of Justice, Bureaucracy, and Media RUPERT GADERER Sense of Justice ›Quarrelers‹, according to the president of the German justice in connection with the Anglo-American law-and- Federal Administrative Court between 1958 and 1969, emotion debate,3 which in German-speaking countries should not be judged with the same standards as a has been discussed for the most part under the concept common citizen.1 People who take excessive legal action ›Rechtsgefühl‹ (sense of justice). In Germany, most of the and fle countless complaints are – in his opinion – contributions have come from the feld ›legal sociology‹ usually sick. Still today forensic psychiatry assumes that and in recent years research has been carried out in such querulous behavior is the result of a pathological the cultural and literary sciences.4 The present media- increase in an emotion, or more specifcally a pathological historical investigation of litigious paranoia takes these increase in a person’s ›sense of justice‹.2 Litigious results into consideration and emphasizes three aspects paranoia is said to be an obsessive endeavor to realize in particular. First, the question of the historicity of justice and a concept of justice – the origin of which can emotions is pursued, the temporally and spatially be found in the human psyche. It is precisely the legal dependent power derived from emotions to take action system and psychiatry that, in the history of litigious and the social contextualization of emotions.5 Second, paranoia or paranoia querulans, have dealt extensively those media are shifted from the periphery to the center with this behavior, after all they, as the observers of of cognitive interest which are brought into play to society and the authorities for pronouncing judgments, transfer the fury, the hate, but also the desperation and were and are most afected by it.
    [Show full text]
  • Engineers in India: Industrialisation, Indianisation and the State, 1900-47
    Engineers in India: Industrialisation, Indianisation and the State, 1900-47 A P A R A J I T H R AMNATH July 2012 A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Imperial College London Centre for the History of Science, Technology and Medicine DECLARATION This thesis represents my own work. Where the work of others is mentioned, it is duly referenced and acknowledged as such. APARAJITH RAMNATH Chennai, India 30 July 2012 2 ABSTRACT This thesis offers a collective portrait of an important group of scientific and technical practitioners in India from 1900 to 1947: professional engineers. It focuses on engineers working in three key sectors: public works, railways and private industry. Based on a range of little-used sources, it charts the evolution of the profession in terms of the composition, training, employment patterns and work culture of its members. The thesis argues that changes in the profession were both caused by and contributed to two important, contested transformations in interwar Indian society: the growth of large-scale private industry (industrialisation), and the increasing proportion of ‘native’ Indians in government services and private firms (Indianisation). Engineers in the public works and railways played a crucial role as officers of the colonial state, as revealed by debates on Indianisation in these sectors. Engineers also enabled the emergence of large industrial enterprises, which in turn impacted the profession. Previously dominated by expatriate government engineers, the profession expanded, was considerably Indianised, and diversified to include industrial experts. Whereas the profession was initially oriented towards the imperial metropolis, a nascent Indian identity emerged in the interwar period.
    [Show full text]
  • Bureaucratic Indecision and Risk Aversion in India
    Working Paper Bureaucratic Indecision and Risk Aversion in India Sneha P., Neha Sinha, Ashwin Varghese, Avanti Durani and Ayush Patel. About Us IDFC Institute has been set up as a research-focused think/do tank to investigate the political, economic and spatial dimensions of India’s ongoing transition from a low-income, state-led country to a prosperous market-based economy. We provide in-depth, actionable research and recommendations that are grounded in a contextual understanding of the political economy of execution. Our work rests on two pillars — ‘Transitions’ and ‘State and the Citizen’. ‘Transitions’ addresses the three transitions that are vital to any developing country’s economic advancement: rural to urban, low to high productivity, and the move from the informal to formal sector. The second pillar seeks to redefine the relationship between state and citizen to one of equals, but also one that keeps the state accountable and in check. This includes improving the functioning and responsiveness of important formal institutions, including the police, the judicial system, property rights etc. Well-designed, well-governed institutions deliver public goods more effectively. All our research, papers, databases, and recommendations are in the public domain and freely accessible through www.idfcinstitute.org. Disclaimer and Terms of Use The analysis in this paper is based on research by IDFC Institute (a division of IDFC Foundation). The views expressed in this paper are not that of IDFC Limited or any of its affiliates. The copyright of this paper is the sole and exclusive property of IDFC Institute. You may use the contents only for non-commercial and personal use, provided IDFC Institute retains all copyright and other proprietary rights contained therein and due acknowledgement is given to IDFC Institute for usage of any content.
    [Show full text]
  • Situation in the Different Sectors
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Archive of European Integration COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES Brussels, 18.11.2008 SEC(2008) 2854 COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT accompanying the 25th ANNUAL REPORT ON MONITORING THE APPLICATION OF COMMUNITY LAW (2007) SITUATION IN THE DIFFERENT SECTORS {COM(2008) 777 final} {SEC(2008) 2855} EN EN TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 ENTERPRISE AND INDUSTRY ............................................................................. 16 1.1 General introduction...................................................................................................16 1.2 Automotive Industry.................................................................................................. 17 1.2.1 Current position.......................................................................................................... 17 1.2.2 Changes underway..................................................................................................... 18 1.2.3 Evaluation .................................................................................................................. 18 1.3 Chemicals................................................................................................................... 19 1.3.1 Dangerous substances and preparations..................................................................... 19 1.3.2 Fertilizers and detergents ........................................................................................... 20 1.3.3 Drug precursors.........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]