EU Integration Process Development PDF

The origins and development of the European integration process and of the EU legal order EU LAW (Global Law) a. a. 2024/2025 PROF. AVV. LUCA CALZOLARI, PH.D, LL.M 0 The origins of the European integration process  End of the S...

The origins and development of the European integration process and of the EU legal order EU LAW (Global Law) a. a. 2024/2025 PROF. AVV. LUCA CALZOLARI, PH.D, LL.M 0 The origins of the European integration process  End of the Second World War  Push toward the establishment of international organization in order to maintain peace  New international organizations are created not only in Europe (e.g. NATO) and, as a matter of principle, they are conferred with specific and sectorial competences (e.g. OSCE and the Council of Europe)  They are all examples of “traditional” and “ordinary” forms of intergovernmental cooperation  The world is divided in two “blocks”: what role for Europe? 1  The Hague Congress (1948) (AKA, “the Congress for Europe”)  First federal moment in European history  Three different «projects» for the future of Europe are discussed:  Confederal = the future Europe should look as a traditional international organization: cooperation, but predominant role of the States (Churchill, De Gaulle)  Federalist = no more national States and establishment of a single federal State. National states to become regional entity of the latter (Einaudi, Spinelli)  Functionalist = integration between the European States shall be guided by supranational institutions and cannot but be progressive and achieved step after step leading to an higher 2 level of integration (Schuman)  The Schuman Declaration (1950)  The well-known Schuman Declaration pursues two main purposes: a short term one (avoid conflicts in Europe) and a long term one (laying the foundations for the creation of an ever closer union of the European States and their citizens)  Schuman’s project is based on the functionalist approach  Step by step approach = “Europe will not be made all at once, or according to a single plan. It will be built through concrete achievements which first create a de facto solidarity”  Role of individuals = “The contribution which an organised and living Europe can bring to civilisation is indispensable to the maintenance of peaceful relations"  Role of institutions = Nothing is possible without men’s 3 will, but nothing can last without institutions  The European Coal and Steel Community (1951) (1)  The ECSC is established by the 1951 Paris Treaty  The ECSC is the first step of the European integration process  The ECSC’s main objective is to achieve the common production and trading of coal and steel among the Member States  The Paris Treaty was set to last 50 years (it ceased to exist in 2002) 4  The European Coal and Steel Community (1951) (2)  Six Founding States (France, Germany, Italy, Belgium, Netherlands and Luxembourg)  The Institutional framework is similar to that of the EEC (on which see infra)  High Authority (supranational institution)  Council  Parliamentary Assembly  Court of Justice  The so-called Spaak Commission is immediately established in order to study the next steps of the integration process 5  European Atomic Energy Community (EURATOM)  The EURATOM has been created by a Treaty executed in Rome in 1957 and entered into force in 1958 (as the EEC, on which see infra)  Similarities with the ECSC  EURATOM is an initiative with a sectorial and well defined scope of application, i.e. atomic energy  EURATOM has the same six founding States  Differences with the ECSC  No expiration date = this is a clear evidence of the intention of the founding States to create a long-lasting integration  It is still in force 6  … and eventually, the EEC (1)  Treaty of Rome of 1957  The EEC “shall have as its task, by establishing a common market and progressively approximating the economic policies of Member States, to promote throughout the Community a harmonious development of economic activities, a continuous and balanced expansion, an increase in stability, an accelerated raising of the standard of living and closer relations between the States belonging to it” (art. 2 EEC)  The main goal is to “lay the foundations of an ever-closer union among the peoples of Europe” 7  … and eventually, the EEC (2)  Differently from the ECSC and the EURATOM, the EEC Treaty has a broad and horizontal scope: what does it means?  That in this case the Member States intended to give the new international organization broad and “general” competences, which are not limited to a specific sector (such as coal and steel production, or atomic energy)  Main competences conferred by the Member States to the EEC = establishment of a common/internal/single competitive market (through the economic fundamental freedoms and the competition policy) and so-called ancillary policies (es. transports, agricultural policy, commercial policy)  The intuitional framework of the EEC is quite complex and includes institutions which are authentically supranational and are granted by the Member States with very significant powers (es. Commission and European 8 Court of Justice)  The institutional framework of the three Communities (ECSC, EURATOM and EEC)  Each of the three Communities has (i) a Commission (High Authority under the ECSC), (ii) a Council (iii) an Assembly (i.e., a Parliament) as well as (iv) a Court of Justice  This institutional framework is only partially shared among the three Communities : only the Court of Justice and the Parliamentary Assembly are the same for all the three Communities  The Commission (High Authority under the ECSC) and the Council are different bodies under the three Communities and are granted with different powers in each of them  1967 = so-called Merger Treaty  The previously separated institutions of the Council and the Commission for the three Communities are brought together and provided with a single budget  Of course the competences and powers conferred to them remain different for each of the three Communities 9  First setbacks in the integration process: the failure of the CED  Failure of the project for a Common European Defence (CED)  After the establishment of the ECSC and before the EEC and the Euratom the possibility to create a Common European Defence was discussed  It was a French initiative, as France was worried about the potential rearmament of Germany  Clearly, the defence sector is particularly sensitive and quite connected to national sovereignty, so the realization of this project would have had a quite strong impact on the integration process (also form the political viewpoint)  However, the UK backed down and the Treaty was not ratified by France in 1954 10  The so-called “empty chair” crisis …  In the early ‘60, the Commission proposed (i) to set aside, for certain areas, the unanimity rule according to which the Council voted and (ii) reinforce the role of the Parliament and of the Commission itself  French President De Gaulle is not in favour of further integration at the supranational level (and, in particular, to the conferral of new powers to the Commission and the Parliament)  France remained in the EEC but between 1965 and 1966 De Gaulle applied the so called “empty chair” strategy: France refused to take part into the meetings of the Council and de facto it blocked its activities and therefore the whole EEC (as the Council had still to vote according to the unanimity rule) 11... and the Luxembourg Compromise (1966)  If a member state objects that an act of the Council to be adopted by qualified majority vote could affect its fundamental interests, adoption is postponed  In practice, this is a kind of veto power that ends up preventing the application of the qualified majority rule even in (cases where it was provided for in the Treaties)  Positive vs negative integration (v. Cassis de Dijion and Dassonville cases) 12  Single European Act (1986)  Preceded by the Document on the European Identity (1973), the election of the members of the European parliament by direct universal suffrage (1979) and by the White Paper on the internal market (1985)  The SEA codifies the role of the European Council  The SEA introduced the possibility for the Council to vote with a qualified majority (no longer unanimity) with regard to specific matters (e.g. for the adoption of harmonising rules of the internal market)  The SEA reinforced the role of the European Parliament (es. introduction of the cooperation and consultation procedures) although in limited areas  New competences are conferred by the Member States to the EEC (es. environmental protection and scientific research)  A deadline for the creation of the internal market is set (31 December 1992) 13  Maastricht Treaty (1992)  In 1990, the Dublin European Council convened the Intergovernmental Conference international convention to discuss the possibility to amend the Treaty  In 1991, the Maastricht European Council approved the text  It is very significant step toward an higher level of integration among the Member States  The economic nature of the integration process is no longer relevant (European Economic Community)  The European Union is established and is construed on the well-known three pillars structure, composed by the European Community, the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) as well as the Justice and Home Affairs (JHA)  The three pillar structures reflects the division between the so-called “community method” and traditional intragovernmental cooperation  The EU citizenship is created 14  Maastricht Treaty (1992) (3) EUROPEAN UNION EUROPEAN JUSTICE AND COMMUNITY COMMON HOME AFFAIRS (e.g., internal FOREIGN (e.g. judicial cooperation in market, AND criminal and civil competition, SECURITY matters, borders, economic and visas and POLICY immigration) monetary policy) THE TREATIES 15  Maastricht Treaty (1992) (3) First Pillar Second and third pillars Community method Intergovernmental method  Presence of bodies representing  Prominent role of the States and the international organisation per of their representatives se  Prevailing quorum: unanimity  Prevailing quorum: qualified  Limited possibility to adopt majority binding acts  Significant power to adopt legally  Weak (where not absent) judicial binding acts scrutiny 16  Maastricht Treaty (1992) (2)  The so-called Economic and Monetary Union is established  Further reinforcement of the role of the EU Parliament = creation of the co-decision procedure (now, under the Lisbon Treaty, the ordinary legislative procedure)  The fundamental principles of subsidiarity and proximity are codified in the text of the Treaty (they deal with the exercise of competences by the EU institutions)  New competence are conferred to the EU (es. consumer protection, healthcare, industry, etc.) and others are strengthened  The Maastricht Treaty formally acknowledged that the EU respects individual fundamental rights as well as the national identity of its Member States 17  Amsterdam Treaty (1997)  After the Fall of the Berlin wall (1989) the division of the world in two blocks ended (or was thought to have ended, as we see nowadays)  Several states are now interested (and free) to join the EU  Also in the light of the envisaged enlargement, there is a clear need to revise and simplify the rules governing the functioning of the EU (e.g. the decision making procedures)  Intergovernmental Conference of Turin (1996) and the Dublin European Council (1997) 18  Amsterdam Treaty (1997) (2)  Partial amendment of the pillar structure:  Replacement of the third pillar = Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) has been replaced by the “police and judicial cooperation”  “Communitarization” of visas, immigration, asylum and other policies related to free movement of persons (included cooperation in civil justice matters)  Introduction of enhanced cooperation for first and third pillar (Europe «à la carte») – examples?  High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy  Codification of the principle of transparency for the activities and documents of the EU institutions 19  Treaty of Amsterdam – 1997 (2)  «The Union is founded on the principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law, principles which are common to the Member States.» (art. 6 TEU)  Introduction of a special procedure to ensure their respect by the Member States (art. 7 TEU = the Council, on proposal of 1/3 of the Member States or of the Commission, and with the assent of the Parliament can determine that there is a clear risk of a serious breach by a Member State of the values referred above (Hungary, Poland etc)  Suspension of some of the rights of the Member State (but not its duties) 20  Treaty of Nice – 2001  1999 Helsinki European Council convened the Intergovernmental Conference 1999  The project was very ambitious as a complete revision of the institutional framework was envisaged, also in the light of the then incumbent enlargement of the EU to many new States  The Parliament and the Commission attempted to include ambitious profiles and proposed, inter alia, a new division of competences between the EU and the Member States, measures to reduce the so-called democratic deficit, etc.  However, actual results are lower than what was expected  There is, however, a very important profile to be remembered: the adoption of the CFREU, i.e. Charter of Nice (not binding) 21  The (failed) project of the Treaty establishing a European Constitution (2004)  At the meeting held in Laken in 2001, the European Council convened a Convention in order to discuss the future of Europe.  Also subjects other than the governments of the Member States participated to the works of the Convention  Later on, the Intergovernmental Conference is convened by the European Council of Rome.  The final text of the Constitution is approved in 2004  Although called constitution, it is of course an international Treaty  However, the Constitution never entered into force  The project fails following rejection of its ratification in The Netherlands and France (national referendum)  Another setback in the integration process? 22  The (failed) project of the Treaty establishing a European Constitution (2004)  (attempted) Reinforcement of the political dimension of the integration process, also from a symbolic viewpoint  Extensive use of the term constitution/constitutional  Legitimisation of the EU based on both the “will of the citizens and States of Europe”  Use of the term “laws” to indicate EU secondary legislation (rather than regulations, directives, decisions etc)  EU anthem, hymn, flag and public holiday  Inclusion of the CFREU in the text of the Treaty  Codification of the principle of primacy of EU law over national law  The (failed) EU Constitution anticipated many elements that were then included in the Treaty of Lisbon  Abolition of the pillar structure  Direct democracy (legislative initiative of the EU citizens)  Role of the national parliament in the EU legislative 23procedure  Simplified procedures to amend the Treaties  The Treaty of Lisbon (2009)  The Intergovernmental Conference was convened in July 2007, shortly after the failure of the Constitution Project, and the Treaty was signed in December 2007  The ratification process was long and complex (e.g. = the national referendum in Ireland initially rejected the Treaty)  The Treaty of Lisbon is composed by two Treaties which have the very same legal value  The Treaty on the European Union (TEU) – (basic rules + detailed legal regime of the Common Foreign and Security Policy – CFSP)  Treaty on the functioning of the European Union (TFEU)  The European Community ceases to exist, it is entirely replaced by the EU (which acquired legal personality)  No more structure in pillars (but a specific intergovernmental regime for the CFSP)  The CFREU acquired binding legal force but it is “moved” to an Annex to the Treaties.  All profiles having a federal and/or constitutional 24 symbolism are deleted  Thank you! Questions? PROF. AVV. LUCA CALZOLARI, LL.M, PH.D [email protected] 25