DYNAMICS OF INSTITUTIONAL COOPERATION IN THE EUROPEAN UNION

1a. Formal and informal mechanisms of cooperation in EU external relations. A Case Study on the European Commission

Supervisor: Prof. Dr Sophie Vanhoonacker (Email: s.vanhoonacker@maastrichtuniversity.nl), Maastricht University

PhD: Anne-Claire Marangoni (Email: a.marangoni@maastrichtuniversity.nl)

Short project description: The European Union manifests itself in many different ways in EU external relations: through its trade policy, development cooperation, humanitarian aid, and the Common Foreign and Security Policy. The coordination of these different foreign policy activities is not only a problem for inter-institutional cooperation in the EU policymaking process, it also challenges the capacity of individual institutions to speak with one voice. An extra complication is that that the different policies have their own decision making procedures and follow a different integration logic. While the first pillar follows the supranational Community method, the second pillar of CFSP is based on intergovernmental cooperation. This PhD project examines institutional consistency in the European Commission. Through a series of case studies it examines the organizational structures, the legal instruments and procedures and the informal practices to coordinate EU external relations amongst the various Commissioners and Directorates General. It analyses how this (lack of) coordination affects its relations with other institutional players such as the Council and the European Parliament and links it to the broader question of the EU’s international role.

Links with other partners and projects: This research will be executed in conjunction with a parallel research project at the University of Loughborough on the Council. This will not only allow a comparison between both institutions, it will also provide a building block for future research on inter-institutional cooperation between these two players.

1b. Inter-institutional cooperation in the EU decision-making process after the Lisbon Treaty with a special focus on the European Parliament

a) the extension of co-decision to new policy areas raises the question how the EP will continue to exercise its legislative role. Currently around 70% of co-decision acts are concluded in first reading, which leads some to question the legitimacy of the procedure as decisions are taken behind closed doors by non-mandated actors. PhD research could shed more light on empirical aspects of co-decision for example by way of comparative cases studies to then come to more normative observations.

b) The changing dynamics of executive-legislative relations in the European Union after the Lisbon Treaty, for example in the EP’s new powers of control over the Commission’s delegated powers and the impact that this will have on comitology. The new Framework Agreement between Parliament and Commission also raises important questions about the relations between the two institutions. In-depth empirical research could be undertaken within selected policy fields or on specific issues in order to address the added challenges arising for the EP in terms of internal procedures, expertise and staff numbers in order to make use of its newly-acquired powers and responsibilities.

c) PhD projects could also focus on the question of how the need for expertise in new policy fields and the up-graded role of the EP influences the role of civil servants within the EP, in particular those working in committee secretariats or in the co-decision unit, and might also lead to a transformation of the role of assistants of MEPs.

1c. The Impact of Judicialization Processes on the Europeanization of Migration Policies
 

Supervisor: Prof. Dr. Sophie Vanhoonacker (Email: s.vanhonacker@maastrichtuniversity.nl) and dr. Maarten Vink (Email: m.vink@maastrichtuniversity.nl), Maastricht University.

PhD: Marie DeSomer (Email: marie.desomer@maastrichtuniversity.nl)

The Lisbon Treaty has been hailed for importantly enhancing the ‘communitarisation’ of policy-making in the area of Justice and Home Affairs (JHA). Amongst others, the Treaty has abolished the restrictions on the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU)’s competences, and the Court now possesses full jurisdiction in the area of migration policies. As a number of commentators suggest, such communitarisation can be expected to lead to a more ‘balanced’ approach towards the management of migration flows.
 

This project will analyze the extent to which the CJEU’s enhanced role impacts upon the Europeanization of migration policies. By reviewing the Court’s case law in this area, it will seek to evaluate in what way ‘judicialization processes’ have influenced both the substances of European migration policies, as the strategic behavior of other policy-making actors regarding these policies. In so doing, it hopes to address and link a number of the core debates surrounding both the nature of Europeanization processes in the area of migration policies, as the role of the CJEU in Europeanization processes generally speaking.