Centralized Enforcement Legitimacy And Good Governance In The Eu

Article 226 EC is the central mechanism of enforcement in the EC Treaty, and has remained unchanged since the original Treaty of Rome. It provides the European Commission, as guardian of the Treaty, with a broad power of policing Member States’ conduct. Article 226 has been traditionally characterised as an arena of secretive negotiation focused on the sole function of effective enforcement. This study seeks to move beyond this approach by characterising Article 226 as a multi-functional mechanism within the Treaty. It does this by examining the central mechanism of enforcement through the normative lenses of legitimacy, good administration and good governance. Centralised Enforcement, Legitimacy and Good Governance in the EU is interdisciplinary in nature, examining law in its political context. It focuses on how the institutions interact and react to competing policy pressures, and explores the tensions that lie at the heart of legitimacy in the actions of public actors by engaging with concepts such as democracy, legitimacy and good administration. Scholars and policy-makers whose work explores Article 226 will find this work especially relevant. It will also appeal to those who are interested in enforcement and regulation in the international/EU arena, as well as those whose work considers concepts such as good governance, legitimacy, and accountability in the EU. It is also relevant to scholars engaged in the study of institutions and processes of interaction and change.

This book approaches the notion of good governance from three different angles. First it establishes whether it is a meaningful notion at all by taking a closer look at the parameters of good governance. Secondly, the authors look at the institutional translation of the criteria of good governance. In a third dimension, the concept may be analysed in relation to a number of substantive issues.

The EU is faced with the perpetual challenge of guaranteeing effective enforcement of its law and policies. This book brings together leading EU scholars in law, politics and regulation, to explore the wealth of new legal and regulatory strategies, practices, and actors that are emerging to complement the classic avenues of central and decentralized enforcement. The contributors evaluate the traditional ‘dual vigilance’ framework of enforcement before examining network(ed) enforcement from theoretical, empirical and legal perspectives. They assess innovations in key EU policy fields such as the environment, consumer protection, competition, freedom, security and justice, and economic governance. This multi-disciplinary book will be of use to students and academics in law, political science, regulation and public policy. It will also interest policy-makers in EU institutions, national administrations and courts engaged in the implementation and enforcement of EU law and policy.

The European Union's growing accountability deficit threatens to undermine its legitimacy; accordingly, member states have agreed to negotiate a new set of Treaty changes in 2004. These essays consider various aspects of accountability and legitimacy in the European Union.

Exploring the constitutional and the administrative law dimensions of the developing European market governance, this volume considers the changes which have occurred from the perspective of both legal and social theory.

Article 226 EC is the central mechanism of enforcement in the EC Treaty, and remains unchanged since the original Treaty of Rome. This book examines Article 226 in the light of contemporary debates including concepts such as democracy, legitimacy, good administration and good governance in the EU.

A comprehensive analysis of the European Commission's general role in supervising member state compliance with EU law, this book provides a detailed assessment of centralized EU enforcement. It starts out by asking whether it is viable to establish stronger Commission powers of enforcement at this point in time. Against this backdrop, and as a means of exploring the role of the Commission, the chapters examine a number of different aspects pertaining to enforcement of EU law. Beginning with an appraisal of the Commission's function under the general EU infringement procedure stipulated in Articles 258 and 260 TFEU, the volume argues that the EU lacks independent self-sustained regime authority. Moreover, this is reflected in both substantive EU law and procedural law, including the general EU infringement procedure. Chapter two makes the case that Article 258 TFEU can usefully be explained in terms of managerialism. Chapter three analyses Article 260 TFEU concerning repetitive infringements. In particular, it asserts, EU member state sanctions sustain the managerial approach. It then goes on to examine the Commission's unsuccessful attempts to gain sharper enforcement powers through secondary legislation, and identifies the effective points of functional overlap between enforcement powers and certain types of implementing tools. Finally, it discusses the Commission's role under various non-binding, ad hoc arrangements. The concluding chapter places the general EU infringement procedure in the broader context of a comprehensive (negotiated) policy process. It argues that the enforcement stage shares many features with earlier steps in the legislative process, including flexibility and deliberation.

This 2005 book argues that Europeanization and globalization have led to ever-more intensive legalization at transnational level. What accounts for compliance beyond the nation-state? The authors tackle this question by comparing compliance with regulations that have been formulated in a very similar way at different levels of governance. They test compliance with rules at the national level, at the regional level (EU), and at a global level (WTO), finding that in fact the EU has higher levels of compliance than both international and national rules. The authors argue that this is because the EU has a higher level of legalization, combined with effective monitoring mechanisms and sanctions. In this respect it seems that the European Union has indeed achieved a high level of legalization and compliance, though the authors add that this achievement does not settle the related queries with the legitimacy of transnational governance and law.