首页> 外文OA文献 >Does the process really matter? Some reflections on the “ legitimating effect” of the European Convention. CES Working Paper, no. 102, 2003
【2h】

Does the process really matter? Some reflections on the “ legitimating effect” of the European Convention. CES Working Paper, no. 102, 2003

机译:这个过程真的重要吗?关于“欧洲公约”“合法化效应”的几点思考。 CEs工作文件,没有。 102,2003

摘要

The European Convention, set up by the Heads of state and governments during the Laeken Summit of December 2001, was presented by its initiators as a means of strengthening the legitimacy of the EU. Is this a rhetorical argument of politicians, which could be explained by the intense electoral cycle of 2002- 2004? Or is there something, in the process of the Convention, that could change the nature of the EU constitution? This paper argues that the Convention is not likely to transform the nature of the EU. The arguments put forward by its members, and the partial compromises reached at this stage, show that the conventionnels are willing to rationalize the acquis, rather than launch a new phase of integration; this Convention will not be remembered as a European Philadelphia. I then turn to the process of the Convention in order to assess its potential effect in terms of legitimation of the EU. I argue that the EU’s alleged “democratic deficit” is merely a problem of standards: though the EU can be seen as a fully accountable and legitimate polity in Madisonian terms (Moravcsik), it is still seen as an unsatisfying arrangement when interpreted in more demanding “republican” terms (Habermas). This is the reason why the Convention might be useful: if it managed to reduce cognitive and normative dissonance, it could help soften conflicts of interpretation of the nature of the EU among leaders. Moreover, by clarifying the role of the EU, it could reduce public expectations and the frustrations they engender. I conclude that the Convention is an exercise of reappraisal and confirmation of the EU’s founding pact, but that even this rather modest role is important in terms of legitimacy because of the nature of the EU constitutional process: since the existing treaties are the result of a long piecemeal and instrumental process of bargaining among member states, the EU lacks clear and accepted normative foundations. Even if it only clarifies and confirms the status quo, the Convention, and the public debates to which the ratification of the treaty might give rise after the IGC, might help root the EU’s founding pact in the public’s conscience.
机译:由国家元首和政府首脑在2001年12月举行的Laeken峰会期间制定的《欧洲公约》是其发起者提出的,目的是加强欧盟的合法性。这是政客的口头辩论,可以用2002-2004年激烈的选举周期来解释吗?还是在《公约》的过程中,有什么可以改变欧盟宪法的性质?本文认为,该公约不太可能改变欧盟的性质。它的成员提出的论点以及在此阶段达成的部分妥协表明,各会议委员会愿意合理化收购,而不是发起一个新的整合阶段。这项公约将不被视为欧洲的费城。然后,我将谈谈《公约》的过程,以便评估其在欧盟合法性方面的潜在影响。我认为,欧盟所谓的“民主赤字”仅是一个标准问题:尽管按照麦迪逊式的观点,欧盟可以被视为完全负责和合法的政体(Moravcsik),但在更具挑战性的解释中,它仍然被视为不令人满意的安排。 “共和党”用语(哈贝马斯)。这就是为什么该公约可能有用的原因:如果该公约设法减少了认知和规范上的不和谐,它将有助于缓解领导人之间对欧盟本质的解释冲突。此外,通过阐明欧盟的作用,它可以减少公众的期望和他们带来的挫败感。我的结论是,《公约》是对欧盟创始条约的重新评估和确认,但由于欧盟制宪程序的性质,就合法性而言,即使是相当适度的作用也很重要:因为现有条约是欧盟制定条约的结果。欧盟之间的讨价还价是漫长而零碎的工具性过程,因此欧盟缺乏明确和公认的规范基础。即使只是澄清和确认了现状,《公约》以及在IGC之后可能引发对条约的批准的公开辩论,也可能有助于将欧盟的立宪条约植根于公众的良心。

著录项

  • 作者

    Magnette Paul.;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2003
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 {"code":"en","name":"English","id":9}
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号