THE SOCIO-POLITICAL ANALYSIS OF EU’S INSTITUTIONAL DEFICITS WITHIN THE EXTENT OF DEMOCRATIC GOVERNANCE

Abstract

The EU began its journey at the beginning of the second half of the twentieth century as a sectoral cooperation between the six founding member states and progressed miraculously by creating an economic union and then a political union with the new members. Throughout the years it has developed with new members and institutional set up in order to cope with the tremendous issues concerning the administration of the European people. It has advanced to such an extent that recently its structure and institutions have been questioned in terms of congruence with democratic rules and procedures; and what is more, this is usually done by comparing the EU with democratically and economically developed states. This article tries to indicate the institutional deficits of EU in achieving the aforementioned aims

Keywords

• Institutional deficit, legitimacy, political accountability, transparency, decision- making process

References

1. Alvarez, M., Cheibub, J. A., Limongi, F. and Przeworski, A., 1996, ‘Classifying Political
2. Regimes’, Studies in Comparative International Development, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 3–36. Qted in Zweifel, D. T.,2002a, Democratic Deficit?, Lenxington Books, Oxford, Newyork.
3. Barker, R., 1993, ‘Democracy and Individual Freedom’ in A.M.Rieu and G. Duprat (eds.)
4. European Democratic Culture, Routledge, London. Qted in Mather, J., 2001, ‘The
5. European Parliament- A Model of Representative Democracy?’, West European Politics, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 181-201. Bealey, F., 1998, The Blackwell Dictionary of Political Science, Blackwell Publishers
6. Massachusetts. Qted in Neuhold, C., 2001, ‘The Legislative Backbone-Keeping The Institution Upright? The Role of European Parliament.
7. Braud, P., 1997, ‘Decline of the Founding Values of Democracy and Weakening of Quasi
8. Missionary Institutions’, Studies in Comparative International Development, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 112-124. Carter, C. And Scott, A., 1998, ‘Legitimacy and Governance Beyond the European Nation

9. State: Conceptualising Governance in the European Union’, European Law Journal, vol. , no. 4, pp.429-446. Casey, L.A., and Rivkin Jr., D. B., 2001, ‘Europe in the Balance’, Policy Review, no.107, pp. 41-54.
10. Christiansen, T., 1997, ‘Legitimacy Dilemmas of Supranational Governance: The European Commission between Accountability and Independence’, European University
11. Institute Working Papers, no. 97/74. Chryssochoou, D. N., 2001, 'Models of Democracy and the European Polity’, University of Exeter Working Papers, no. 1/2001.
12. Commission of the European Communities, 2001, White Paper on ‘European Governance’, COM (2001) 428.
13. Corbett, R., 1999, ‘The European Parliament and the Idea of European Representative
14. Government’ in J. Pinder (ed.), Foundation of Demoracy in the European Union, Palgrave Publishers, New York. Coultrap, J., 1999, ‘From Parliamentarism to Pluralism: Models of Democracy and the European Union’s Democratic Deficit’, Journal of Theoretical Politics, vol. 11, no. 1, pp.107-135.
15. Dahrendorf, R., 2001, ‘Can European Democracy Survive Globalization?’, National Interest, no.65, pp.17-23.
16. Decker, F., 2002, ‘Governance Beyond the Nation-State. Reflections on the Democratic
17. Deficit of the European Union’, Journal of European Public Policy, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 256– Egeberg, M., 2002, ‘The European Commission-The Evolving EU Executive’, Arena Working Papers, no. 02/30.
18. Eichengreen, B., 2003, ‘Putting It Together: The Foibles and Future of the European
19. Union’, Foreign Affairs, vol. 82, no. 4, pp. 194-201. Eriksen, E. O., 2001, ‘Democratic or Technocratic Governance?’, A Contribution to
20. ‘Mountain or Molehill? A Critical Appraisal of the Commission White Paper on Governance’, Jean Monnet Working Paper, no.6/01. Eriksen, E. O. And Fossum, J. E., 2001, ‘Democracy Through Strong Publics İn The European Union?’, Arena Working Papers, no. WP 01/16.
21. Eurobarometer, 1995, no. 42, pp. 34-35. Qted in Braud, P., 1997, ‘Decline of the Founding
22. Values of Democracy and Weakening of Quasi-Missionary Institutions’, Studies in Comparative International Development, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 112-124. European Parliament Elections Web Page, 2004, [online], available: http://www.elections2004.eu.int/ep- election/sites /en/results1306/ graphical.html, (25 June ).
23. European Parliament Official Web Page, 2004, [online], available:http://www. europarl.org.uk/guide/Gelectionsmain.html (23 April 2004).
24. Fİllesdal, A., 2000, ‘Theories of Democracy for Europe: Multi-level Challenges for Multi- level Governance’, Unpublished Workshop Paper, [online], available: http://www. arena.uio.no, (30 January 2003).
25. Habermas, J., 1996, Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of
26. Law and Democracy, trans. by W. Rehg, MIT Press, MA, Cambridge. Qted in Entrikin, J.N., 1999, ‘Political Community, Identity and Cosmopolitan Place’, International
27. Sociology, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 269–282. Héritier, A., 1999, ‘Elements of Democratic Legitimation in Europe: an Alternative
28. Perspective’, Journal of European Public Policy, v. 6, n. 2, pp. 269-82. Helmbring, K, 2002, ‘Procedural Reforms of the EU Legislative Process. Increased Power for the European Parliament?’, CFE Working Papers, Centre for European Studies at Lund University.
29. Helmer, R., 2002, ‘Federalism in the USA and the EU’, [online], available: http://www.rogerhelmer.com/cheyenne.asp, (21 July 2004).
30. Joerges, C., 2001, ‘“Economic order” – “technical realization”– “the hour of the executive”: Some Legal Historical Observations on the Commission White Paper on
31. European Governance’, A Contribution to ‘Mountain or Molehill? A Critical Appraisal of the Commission White Paper on Governance’, Jean Monnet Working Paper, No.6/01. Lijphart, A., 1991, Parliamentary Versus Presidential Government, Oxford University
32. Press, Oxford. Qted in Judge, D. and Earnshaw, D., 2002, ‘The European Parliament and the Commission Crisis: A New Assertiveness?’, Governance: An International Journal of
33. Policy, Administration, and Institutions, vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 345–374. Lijphart, A., 1984, Democracies: Patterns of Majoritarian and Consensus Government in
34. Twenty-one Countries, Yale University Press, New Haven, CT. Qted in Judge, D. and Earnshaw, D., 2002, ‘The European Parliament and the Commission Crisis: A New
35. Assertiveness?’, Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions, vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 345–374. Lipset, S. M., 1994 ‘The Social Requisites of Democracy Revisited’, American
36. Sociological Review, vol. 59, no. 1, pp. 1-22. Livingston, W., 1956, Federalism and Constitutional Change, Clarendon Press, Oxford.
37. Qted in Thorlakson, L., 2003, 'Comparing Federal Institutions: Power and Representation in Six Federation', West European Politics, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 1-22.
38. Lodge, J., 2003, ‘Transparency and EU Governance: Balancing Openness with Security’
39. Journal of Contemporary European Studies, vol. 11, no. 1. Mather, J., 2001, ‘The European Parliament- A Model of Representative Democracy?’
40. West European Politics, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 181-201. Moravcsik, A., 2001a, ‘Despotism in Brussels?’ Foreign Affairs, vol. 80, no. 3, pp. 114-22.
41. Moravcsik, A., 2001b, ‘People and Parliament in the European Union: Participation
42. Democracy, Legitimacy’, The American Political Science Review, vol. 95, no.2, p. 512. Mueller, D. C., 1997, ‘Federalism and the European Union: A Constitutional Perspective’
43. Public Choice, no. 90, pp. 255–280. Muntean, A. M., 2000, ‘The European Parliament’s Political Legitimacy and the Commission’s “Misleading Management”: Towards a “Parliamentarian” European
44. Union?’ European Integration online Papers (EIoP), vol. 4, no.5. Neuhold, C., 2001, ‘The Legislative Backbone-Keeping The Institution Upright? The Role of European Parliament Committees in the EU Policy-Making Process’, European
45. Integration online Papers (EIoP), vol. 5, no. 10. Peter, F., 1999, ‘Europe United But Who Runs It?’, Christian Science Monitor, 1/13/99, vol. 91, issue. 33.
46. Rasmussen, A., 2000, ‘Institutional Games Rational Actors Play- The Empowering of the European Parliament’, European Integration Online Papers (EIoP), vol. 4, no. 1, pp.1-20.
47. Raunio, T., 2000, ‘Second-rate Parties ?: Towards a Better Understanding of the European
48. Parliament's Party Groups’, Qted in Neuhold, C., 2001.
49. Rittberger, B., 2003, ‘Removing Conceptual Blinders: Under What Conditions Does the Democratic Deficit Affect Institutional Design Decisions?’, ConWEB Papers, no. 5, pp. 1
50. online], available: http://les1.man.ac.uk /conweb/, (17 November 2003).
51. Roland, E. G., Kaufmann, A., Kleger, B, H., (eds.),1995, Transnational Democracy
52. Realotobia, Zurich, [online], available: http://frontpage.auburn.edu /tann/tann2/gross.html, (14 January 2003).
53. Rovni, J., 2003, ‘Approaches to the Democratic Deficit of the European Union’, Perspectives, no.19.
54. Serbanescu, I., 2000, ‘Deficient Democracy’, Harward International Review, vol. Summer, pp. 10-12.
55. Schmidt, S., 1997, ‘ European Integration and Democracy: the Differences among the Member States. J. Eur. Public Policy, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 128-45. Qted in Fabbrini, S., 2003
56. ‘Bringing Robert A. Dahl’s Theory of Democracy to Europe’, Annual Reviews Political Science, vol. 6, pp. 119-37. Steinberg, P., 2001, ‘Agencies, Co-Regulation and Comitology - and What About Politics
57. ?‘, A Contribution to ‘Mountain or Molehill? A Critical Appraisal of the Commission White Paper on Governance’, Jean Monnet Working Paper, No.6/01 Sullivan, A., 2001, ‘Union Due’, New Republic, 05/21/2001, vol. 224, no. 21, p. 8.
58. Tsakatika, M., 2002, ‘Why Political Responsibility is Lacking in The EU: The Legacy of the Monnet Method’, A Paper presented in the PSA Conference of University of Aberdeen on 5-7 April 2002.
59. Wallace, H., 1996, ‘Politics and Policy in the EU: The Challenge of Governance’, in H.
60. Wallace and W. Wallace (eds.), Policy-Making in the European Union, Oxford University Press, Oxford, Newyork, pp.3-35. Wallace, H. and Wallace, W. eds., 1996, Policy-Making in the European Union, Oxford
61. University Press, Oxford, Newyork. Weale, A. (ed.), 1998, Political Theory & the European Union: Legitimacy, Constitutional
62. Choice & Citizenship, Routledge, Florence, KY, USA. Weiler, J.H.H., 2000a, ‘Federalism and Constitutionalism: Europe’s Sonderweg’, Jean
63. Monnet Working Paper, no. 10/2. Wessels and Diederichs, 1999, ‘The European Parliament and European Legitimacy’, in
64. Bachoff and Smith (eds.), Legitimacy and the European Union, London, pp. 135-138. Qted Rexhep Meidani in Dann, P., 2002, ‘Looking Through the Federal Lens: The Semi-Parliamentary
65. Democracy of the EU’, Jean Monnet Working Paper, no. 5/02 Wessels and Diederichs, 1999, ‘The European Parliament and European Legitimacy’, in
66. Bachoff and Smith (eds.), Legitimacy and the European Union, London, pp. 135-138. Qted in Dann, P., 2002, ‘Looking Through the Federal Lens: The Semi-Parliamentary
67. Democracy of the EU’, Jean Monnet Working Paper, no. 5/02. Williams, S., 1991, ‘Sovereignty and Accountability in the European Community’, Qted in
68. Lehning, P. B., 1998a, ‘European Citizenship: Between Facts and Norms’, Constellations
69. An International Journal of Critical & Democratic Theory; vol. 4, no. 3, pp.346-368. Wincott, D., 1998, ‘Does the European Union Pervert Democracy? Questions of
70. Democracy in New Constitutionalist Thought on the Future of Europe’, European Law Journal, vol.4, no.4. Woods, N., 1999, ‘Good Governance in International Organizations’, Global Governance, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 39-62.
71. Zweifel, D. T.,2002, Democratic Deficit?, Lenxington Books, Oxford, Newyork.