Você está na página 1de 41

Introduction to EU law

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Structure EU institutions
EU legislation principles
Influence
Accession
Capacity to implement acquis
Partnerships

1. Structure: EU Institutions
- Council of EU (ministers, topic)
- European Council (heads of state)
- European Parliament (732 members
directly elected)
European Commission (1 per state)
European Court of Justice (1 per state)
Court of Auditors

Decision-making (legislation) - 1
Involved institutions:
- Council of Ministers
- European Parliament
- European Commission

Decision-making (legislation) - 2
Different procedures, depending on the
issue (treaty provision used as basis)
Initiative: mostly European Commission
Consultation (EP can advise)
Co-operation (EP can amend, art. 251 EC)
Co-decision (EP can amend,reject, art.
252)

Decision-making (legislation) - 3
3 pillars of EU
EC (used to be EEC, Euratom + ECSC also included)
Common Foreign and Security Policy
Justice and Internal Affairs (police and judicial cooperation
in criminal affairs)

Agriculture part of first pillar. Decision making in pillar 1


mostly co-decision, in others EP less involved
Agriculture policy made by consultation (art. 37 sub 2 EC)

Decision-making (legislation) - 4
Ultimately, Members States (Council or
European Council) have final say

Political decisions by European Council


for instance to deal with impasses

But
After adoption of legislation it is out of
political hands

Court can interprete and give binding


decisions on legislation (creating a
consistent frame of community law)

2. EU Law Principles
EC EU : own system of law, special because

Direct sources of rights and obligations for states and


citizens (van Gend & Loos, 1962) (vs states create
obligations they want)
Priority (previous and later national legislation) (CostaENEL, 1964) (vs later legislation repeals previous
legislation)
Autonomous character of the law system of the EU (vs
states hand over competencies they choose and choose
their obligations)

EU Law Principles - 2

Court decides what is community law!

Court (ECJ) deals with directives, regulations, treaty


provisions in:
Direct approach (Court of First Instance) (also: EP vs EC)
Prejudicial question (referral by national court, national
court acts as EU body in applying EU law)

EU Law Principles - 3

Directives & Regulations (art. 249 EC)


Both are binding for member states. They commit themselves to
transposing them into national law. If a state does not do this (or does it
after the agreed deadline), as a citizen in court you can use them as
follows:
Regulation: direct transposal (literal text of regulation is binding)

Depending on formulation: direct rights and obligations for citizens to use (in
court) clear, intended, target group clear

Directive: state has to formulate own law in line with aim and text of
directive before certain date (commitment is binding, form and methods
up to Member State)

In case of non-compliance and clear: can use (in court)

EU Law Principles 4
Trend:
EU makes policies for more and more issues,
more and more intertwined (ever closer union,
art. 2 EC)
Court reinforces EU order: less space for
national interpretations, emphasis on
harmonising law (interpretation) for EU citizens
(for instance: now criminal punishments for
environmental tresspasses under EU jurisdiction
according to Court!)

EU Law Principles 5
Discussion
EU/Court tends to protect weaker parties
(women, employees, consumers)
Court tends to use Charter of Fundamental
Rights of the EU (Nice 2000, not binding yet
would be binding if Constition were adopted) to
levy the 4 freedoms (movement of goods,
services, persons, capital) (Schmidtberger)
4 freedoms are used to harmonise treatment of
citizens

EU Law Principles 6
Discussion
Member states have less room for own
policies (e.g. NL drug policy,
euthanasia...)

Compromises on political level undermine


unity and clarity of law as applied by ECJ

Influence 1
Political Parties from non-member states are members of
European parties and can influence policies of those
parties -> voting in EP
- Lobby national parties or directly European parties
Member states and candidates can influence policies
Lobby national government
European networks/organisations
- Lobby European networks

4. Influence - 2
Commission initiates policies
Lobby Commission (e.g. Commissioner
Environment open for NGO input)
EU policies tend to favour public participation
Use this as tool on national level (compliance
with EU)
Use legal options available to protest!

For example: fundamental rights, incl. jurisprudence of


ECJ and ECHR

Accession
Copenhagen criteria (1993)

- stable institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human


rights and respect for minorities
- functioning market economy
- acquis and support the various aims of the European Union
- public administration capable of applying and managing EU laws
in
practice
The EU reserves the right to decide when a candidate country has
met these criteria and when the EU is ready to accept the new
member

Accept acquis (approximation) : legislation + jurisprudence


Monitored by EC, with input from new member states and other
sources

Stabilisation and Association process


Specific for Western Balkans (since 2000,
Zagreb)

Stabilisation and development market


economy
Regional cooperation
Prospect of EU accession

+ elements of previous accession


processes (since 2003, Thessaloniki)

SAp
Stabilisation and Association Agreements
(SAAs)

Gradual alignment to EU legislation in some areas


Free trade area with EU
Regional cooperation
Cooperation with EU on justice, visa, etc

Trade measures
Financial assistance (CARDS)

SAp since Thessaloniki


European Partnerships
Political Cooperation CFSP
Assistance institution building
Promoting economic development
Opening Community programmes, incl
environment

Accession process
Europe Agreements/Association Agreements/SAAs
Accession Partnerships/European Partnerships
Pre-accession assistance (IPA)
Co-financing from IFIs
Participation in EU programmes/agencies/committees
NPAA
Progress Reports/Regular Reports
Political Dialogue

Capacity to implement effectively

Adoption, application and enforcement of acquis


(Copenhagen, Madrid, Luxembourg, Helsinki)
Adjusting structures of administration
Examples: paying agencies in frame of SAPARD:
if not, no SAPARD
Money & Men?

(Nicolaides)
Empowered and accountable institutions +
Decision making independence +
Performance obligations and control

Execution of a task requires:

Knowledge
Ability
Willingness

Knowledge
Knowledge on EU law and policies, obtainable also via
screening process, seminars, advice, etc
Ability
Committing resources, extra staff, trainings, acquaintances
with MS practice (TAIEX, twinning programmes)
Willingness
Mostly neglected according to Nicolaides, related to
institutional design

Willingness
Effective implementation has become a harder
requirement
This is both a clarification (lessons learned) and
a toughening of EU position (raising entry
requirements, unilateral, no criteria for judging
preparedness, bringing commitments forward in
time: before accession it all has be in order)
So preparedness and assessment of this may
obstruct accession!

Willingness
First time that Candidates had to show effective
implementation was in fifth enlargement: 10 new
MS
Integration in EU further advanced, so
weaknesses in administration capacity and
incorrect and incomplete implementation touch
at the core of EU
Also within EU Commission is more and more
supervising implementation

Willingness
How does the EU deal with incorrect and
incomplete implementation internally?
No direct judgement of administrative
capacity but indirectly

Publication of national records of transposition


Publication of surveys of business opinions
Encouraging citizens and businesses to take action
Inspections carried out by the Commission
Legal proceedings against MS
Evaluation by Commission of state of internal market
Monitoring and coordination of national policies
Peer review and pressure

Quality of results, not just transposition


All methods together
Diverse systems in place in EU: extract
basic elements

knowledge ability willingness


a. Observable or quantifiable terms
b. Ability to define targets, actions needed, measuring
results, assessment of achieving targets
c. Conditions in which institute operates must be known
d. Learning capacity
e. Means for adjusting actions: resources + legal power
f.
Mistakes: review, evaluation, adjustment rather than
pretending no mistakes will be made

g. No prior approval needed! (flexibility is needed within


boundaries)
h. Discretion
i. Coordination
j. Accountability (assigned missions, safeguard against
abuse): openness, transparency, explanations,
standards
k. Appeal & judicial control
It becomes in the interest of the institute to perform as
expected!

Effects and impacts on others


Side effects
Behavioural reactions of targeted groups
= reducing compliance costs + strengthening
detection and raising penalties
(Maybe copy existing procedures that work well)

Trust!
EU is asking more detailed information...
Expectations about future behaviour
Track record
Impossible to act in another way
(evaluation + adjusting)
(willingness!)

Elaborate rules
Educate and guide target groups

Partnerships

What is a partnership?

What are reasons to develop a partnership?

Partnerships are for Milieukontakt a more


structured and formalised way of cooperating
with strategically chosen organisations with a
time frame of 2 to 4 years.

Partnership Requirements MKI


Shared mission
Successful experience in cooperation
Mutual trust
Position of partner
Concrete ideas
Insight in SWOT of partners
Stability and capacity
Partner organisation supports broadly
partnership

Reasons for a partnership can be:


united forces can lead to better results
strengthen the organisational capacity
sharing resources, time and capacity can help to realise
the aims more effectively
increasing the efficiency
more effective lobby and better promotion of the work
to learn from each others knowledge and expertise

What is the common ground between the network


members?

What is the common ground between the network and the


ministry?

What can each of us bring to a partnership? What can be our


role?

Who is the other? What are strengths and weaknesses of the


partners?

Why this partnership


Vision/Mission
Aims & Results
What
Duration
What is needed for our partnership to work?
Requirements of each of the partners for the partnership
Shared principles?
Communication
Decision making?
What are the steps to develop the partnership?
MoU?

Você também pode gostar