QA7007089ENC_002.pdf
INTRODUCTION
PART I: THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT REAFIRMS ITS LEGITIMACY
I. The European Parliament asserts its political legitimacy
A. Direct elections and legitimacy of the European Parliament
A.1 From indirect to direct legitimacy
A.2 1979, a democratic revolution: first elections to the European Parliament
1. Electoral participation
2. Nature and relevance of European elections
A.3 Electoral standards and representativeness of the European Parliament
1. Minimum threshold: application and percentage
2. Number of constituencies
3. Fixed party lists and preferential voting
B. Composition of groups within the European Parliament
B.1 Increase in the number of MEPs between 1958 and 2009
B.2 Political composition of the European Parliament (1958-2008)
1. Political groups in the appointed Parliament
2. Groups that emerged following the first direct elections
3. Groups that no longer exist
C. By its involvement in European representative democracy
C.1. European and national parliaments and the democratic deficit
1. The rise to power of the EP
2. The gradual mobilisation of national parliaments
C.2. The European Parliament and national parliaments at the service of European democracy
1. Bilateral parliamentary cooperation
2. Multilateral parliamentary cooperation
3. The Convention method
II. THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT ESTABLISHES ITS LEGITIMACY BY OPENING UP TO CIVIL SOCIETY
A. MEPs: from constituencies to Chamber
A.1. First and foremost elected representatives
A.2. Just like any other elected representative?
B. Lobbying in the European Parliament
B.1. Access to the European Parliament
1. MEPs willing to deal with interest representatives
2. The difficulty with regulating lobbying in the EP
B.2. The special role of intergroups
C. The European Parliament and citizens
C.1. Citizens’ correspondence
C.2. Examination of petitions
C.3. The European Ombudsman
C.4. Visitors and communication policy
C.5. Public hearings
C.6. The European Parliament opens up to public debate
1. Citizens’ forums
2. The Citizens’ Agora
III. THE BATTLE FOR THE CONSTITUTIONALISATION OF THE UNION
A. Parliament, advocate of a European constitution (1979-1990)
B. Parliament’s role in preparing a constitution
C. Parliament’s reaction to the constitutional deadlock (2005-2008)
Conclusion to the first part
Bibliography
PART II: THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT ASSERTS ITS POWERS
I. THE HISTORY OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT’S POWERS
A. Budgetary powers
A.1. From conflict to interinstitutional partnership
1. The profound changes brought about by the 1970 and 1975 treaties: the use of the margin for interpretation in terms of the classification of expenditure and MRI
2. Budgetary peace, the financial perspective and the decisive role of interinstitutional agreements (IIA)
A.2. The budget as leverage to obtain legislative powers
1. Budgetary powers as a ‘driving force’: the institutional dimension
2. ‘Distributive victories’: the reconciliation of budgetary and political priorities
3. The discharge procedure: the budget as a means of political control
A.3. The Treaty of Lisbon and the future of the European Parliament’s budgetary powers
B. Legislative powers
B.1. Consultation and ‘right of postponement’
1. The ‘right of postponement’
2. Optional consultation versus compulsory consultation
B.2. Agenda-setting in the cooperation procedure
B.3. The right of veto in the codecision procedure
1. The codecision procedure
2. The Council’s ability to confirm its common position
3. Did codecision increase the European Parliament’s influence in the legislative procedure?
4. The relative influence of the European Parliament and the Council in the context of codecision
5. Infrequent use of the right of veto
6. Completion phase
7. Informal developments
B. 4. The assent procedure
1. Association agreements
2. Accession agreements
II. INTERINSTITUTIONAL RELATIONS
A. A history of relations between the European Parliament and the Commission
A.1. From 1958 to 1979
A.2. From 1980 to 1995
A.3. From 1995 to the present day
B. Enhanced political control of the Santer Commission
B.1. The BSE crisis and its impact on relations between the European Parliamentand the Commission
B.2. From financial oversight to the ‘Committee of Wise Men’ and the resignation ofthe Santer Commission
1. The 1998 refusal to give a discharge
2. Appointment of the Committee of Wise Men (1999)
C. From the resignation of the Santer Commission to the investiture of the Barroso Commission
C.1. The lessons drawn from a crisis
C.2. The impact of hearings of candidate Commissioners on the composition of the Commission
C.3. A greater political role
D. Future prospects in the context of institutional reform
III. INTERINSTITUTIONAL AGREEMENTS
A. Interinstitutional agreements or arrangements
A.1. Compensating for the shortcomings of the Treaties and facilitating interinstitutionalrelations
A.2. Preparing the content of future treaties
A.3. Putting an end to conflict between institutions
1. Towards budgetary peace
2. Clarifying comitology
3. Better lawmaking together
B. Framework agreements between the European Parliament and the Commission
B.1. Extracting new pledges from the Commission
B.2. Compensating for the shortcomings of the Treaties
B.3. A mutual interest?
B.4. The Prodi Commission
B.5. The Barroso Commission
C. Implementation of the ‘better regulation’ agenda
C.1. Finding a balance between representative and participatory democracy
C.2. Participating in ‘better regulation’ measures and monitoring their implementation
IV. PARLIAMENTARY OVERSIGHT OF THE EXECUTIVE ACTIVITY OF THE COMMISSION
V. RELATIONS BETWEEN THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OTHER INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES OF THE EUROPEAN UNION
A. Relations between the European Parliament and the Council
A.1. Written and oral questions
A.2. The presence of Council representatives in the European Parliament
A.3. Supervision of the common foreign and security policy
A.4. Choosing the High Representative for the common foreign and security policy
A.5. Practical dialogue on a day-to-day basis
B. Relations between the European Parliament and other institutions and bodies of the European Union: limited supervision in theory – widespread control in practice
B.1. The European Central Bank and the European Court of Auditors: appointmentbased control
1. The European Court of Auditors
2. The European Central Bank
B.2. European agencies and the European Parliament: lack of cohesion and mistrust
1. Appointment-based control
2. Information-based control
3. Budgetary control
B.3. The European Ombudsman: a special case
B.4. The European Court of Justice: an exception to the rule
VI. THE INFLUENCE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT ON THE CASE LAW OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE
A. The case law of the Court of Justice and the powers of the European Parliament
B. Legal action by the European Parliament and its influence on the content of Community policy
C. The European Parliament and its campaign for citizens’ rights
PART III: THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AFFIRMS THE VALUES OF THE EUROPEAN UNION
Inclusion of the EU’s values in the Treaties
The European Parliament’s strategy for administering the values of the EuropeanUnion
I. THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF CITIZENS
A. The fight for the Charter and the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights; the European Union accedes to the European Convention on Human Rights
A.1. The long road towards the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union
1. Gradual but vital progress
2. The active participation of the Parliament in the drafting of the Charter of Fundamental Rights
3. Parliament’s fight to incorporate the Charter into the Treaty
A.2. The fight for the accession of the Union to the European Convention on Human Rights
A.3. European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights
1. Respect for citizens’ rights
2. The European Parliament in favour of a European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights
B. The implementation of fundamental rights
B.1. Women’s rights
B.2. Rights of minorities and action for the Roma
B.3. The fight against the rise of fascism, racism, xenophobia and anti-Semitism
B.4. The fight against homophobia
B.5. For an immigration policy that respects human rights
B.6. Right to privacy
C. The European Parliament, citizens’ advocate
C.1. Right to information
C.2 Right of petition
C.3. The European Ombudsman
II. THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, DEMOCRATISATION AND HUMAN RIGHTS AROUND THE WORLD
A. Campaigning against dictatorships
A.1. Former Soviet countries
1. Hungary
2. East Germany
3. Czechoslovakia
4. Poland
5. Bulgaria
6. Romania
7. Baltic states
A.2. Human rights and the USSR
A.3. Southern Europe: progress towards democracy
1. Spain
2. Greece
3. Portugal
B. Parliamentary diplomacy for human rights
B.1. Instruments used by the European Parliament to ensure respect for human rights
1. The assent procedure as a means of protecting human rights
2. The human rights clause
3. Generalised System of Preferences
4. Financial instruments as leverage
5. Political dialogue on human rights
6. Resolutions and the role of urgent debates
B.2 Great causes
1. The fight against the death penalty
2. The fight against world hunger
3. The fight against impunity
4. Humanitarian aid
B.3. Actions in specific regional contexts
1. Delegations
2. Election observation missions
3. Elections in Kosovo
4. Elections in Ukraine
5. Elections in the Palestinian Territories
6. Regional partnerships: ACP, EuroMed, EuroLat
C. The European Parliament, a sounding board for universal values
C.1. State visits
1. Near and Middle East
2. Central and eastern European countries
3. Iraq
C.2. The Parliament, a place of dialogue
C.3 The Sakharov Prize
Conclusion to Part III
CONCLUSION
I – The European Parliament: a parliament like no other?
2 – A Parliament in the making
3 – A third type of parliament?
