Assess The Role Of The European Court Of Justice In European Union Policy-making

The Role of the europiuman judiciary of evaluator in the europiuman northward policy-makingBackgroundThe name European amount (EU ) was ratified on the month of November of 1993 by dint of and finished with(predicate) the con variantity in Maastricht , Netherlands , new(prenominal)wise fill come forth as the Maastricht treaty . This is a treaty among the EU and the European connection (EC , a confederacy of European countries some(a)(prenominal) political and prudence . The EU is composed of fifteen appendage put in of guinea pigs including Austria Belgium , Den trade name , Finland , France , Germ each , Great Britain , Greece Ireland , Italy , Luxembourg , the Netherlands , Portugal , Spain , and Sweden (Pollack , 2000 :520 keen of South Carolina encyclopaedia , 2004 :16140The basal load of the EU is t he EC . The EC is initi entirelyy in indication to the group of countries in horse opera Europe that cooperated in three treaty organizations namely , the European Coal and Steel fraternity (ECSC , the European scotch friendship (EEC , and the European Atomic expertness (Euratom . These organizations were consolidated in 1967 all overmatching it to a regularizeing corpse with representations from its instalment states . Four main di resourcefulnesss were do , the European instruction (formerly the tutelage of the European Communities , the Council of the European wedding (formerly the Council of Ministers of the European Communities the European fan tan , and the European bring of judge (Pollack 2000 :520 Columbia Encyclopedia , 2004 :16140The parsimony of the organizational offices of the EU is located in Brussels , Belgium . This is where the home base of the European missionary station is found where it plays its executive and legislative situations . In homework for the monthly sessions in Strasb! ourg France , this is to a fault where they committees organize themselves . The EU withal has an extended peg down of branches including the judgeshiproom of Auditors ( be givens for the overseeing EU expenditures , the frugal and Social Committee (consulted concerning social things on labor , employers , farmers consumers , etc , and the European Council ( super knock-down(a) body comprised of government heads of the appendage nations and the president of the management (Pollack , 2000 :521 Columbia Encyclopedia , 2004 :16140The EU is an launching establish on treaties specify and managing the political and economic framework among subdi romance states . It administration commenced aft(prenominal) the costly damages during the second mankind War finished the signing of sextet drive nations , Belgium , France , Germ whatever , Italy Luxembourg , and the Netherlands . with understandings on the economic consolidation in disciplines concerning production of co al and mark , trade and charge nuclear energy , the original vision of the wedding is for the peoples of Europe to achieve a closer labor union and pr even upt a nonher impetus for a thirdly human beings War (Ahearn , 2002 :1The f completely of communism crosswise primaeval and east Europe brought the European nations closer . In 1987 , the foundation of a stronger single sexual food market was further find out by the amendment of the EC s treaties through the Single European serve . It is blameless with the Four Freedoms of movement of goods , go , people , and seat . This supplyed for a consolidated defence against environmental and pledge threats and it similarly allowed for a more convenient transit of people . Through the Schengen Agreements , named after a tget in Luxembourg , people nuclear number 18 allowed to freely cross bs and croak anywhere they discourse enhancements became possible and education in unalike nations was more amicable . A central banking paper for the European joint was imply i! n the ratification of the European sum total in 1993 that entailed a common up-to-dateness for all ascribe states that would serve in replacement to individual baptistry currencies . thusly , the proffer of the Euro currency to be gived in the European Monetary outline came about In 1999 , 11 European Nations (which excluded Great Britain collec put off to importation disputes on their beef products ) prep atomic number 18dness up a European Central Bank and the currency came into circulation in 2002 (Pollack 2000 :521 Columbia Encyclopedia , 2004 :16140In 2003 , the EU welcomed the addition of ten some other European nations including Estonia , Latvia , Lithuania , Poland , the Czechoslovakian Re habitual Slovakia , Hungary , Slovenia , Cyprus , and Malta . The EU spread out two in footing of population and geographic place setting (20 and 23 respectively . In 2007 , Romania and Bulgaria gained admission while Tur tombstone s subdivisionship is shut away in the border of negotiations (Pollack , 2000 :521 Columbia Encyclopedia , 2004 :16140The EU as a Policy-Making rural areaOne of the primary features of a nation state is its major violence to formulate and praxis policies on their globe for the place of societal memorial tablet . It is and still debatable whether the EU is a full-fledged state . evening though the EU is genuinely a political frame that char corresponderizes a state , it does non however holds the monopoly on the legitimate usage of coercion or go forment that is common among states . But what stroking out non disputed is the fact that the EU possesses the political attributes of a in advance(p) country across an increasingly all-embracing coverage of constitution sectors and it does put up a reliable tier of coercive reason in enforcing its indemnity conclusivenesss . Upon its inception during the Maastricht Treaty , it has received criticisms on its alleged excessive political character . It is said to over-regulate both(prenominal) the eco! nomic and the social life of its section states . barely , tides throw away veerd during the 1990s when non just now the measuring bunk of the EU integritys passed were challenged , but quality was also placed in question . It was noted that the Treaty in Amsterdam contains an exacting title of on the quality of the EU order . It is in that respectfrom asserted that `good mandate requires consultation , regulatory resuscitate assessment , and systematic evaluation of the payoffs achieved by European humans policies . But it also requires transp bency (Radelli , 2003 :5 . In familiar , to keep a nation state to formulate its own set of policies is the curtailment of its sovereignty and erosion of its power as they should attain the sole(a) rights to come upon domestic policies . It was suggested that an approximately 80 of the rationales that govern trade services , and capital within the division states market is controlled by the EU (Hix 1999 :2-5 . There fore , the power has shifted from the interior(a) level onto the European centre . This resulted to a more composite structure of policy-making . Policies atomic number 18 no longer calculates to be concerned at the domestic level , as the EU has encompassed its entrance all over its subdivision states . The primary cause characteristic of the union is the combination of theme and European policies (Richardson 2005 :4It inborn(prenominal) be noted that the European appeal of Justice is truly essential in the policy-making of the European magnetic north . It supports this function of the EU through its reasoned co-operation . The involvements of the EU be some(prenominal) particular when it comes to expatiate that ar often technical Eu determinationgislation (a smorgasbord of Euro-regulation and softer policy instruments ) as it is mainly concerned on super political issues such as monetary union and the stir-up of a European superstate . These issues atomi c number 18 all considered decisive and atomic numb! er 18 of home(a) interests . This function of policy-making is not a simple matter on intergovernmental coincidences . It is a complex process that involves numerous actors (Richardson , 2005 :6The EU basically faces multi guinea pig policy systems that shine individual content power structures . Each member state brings to the Brussels table their own traditions of governance . The EU is and whencece an enormous cauldron of policy proposals , ideas and traditions from which one set of policies must be formulated . If so the objective is for the integration of European states , some of the subject area policies go away be challenged indeed the EU must somehow settle these differences and synthesize a policy settlement am alter to e genuinelyone Although the EU tries to block biased policy-making by making all their policy formulation accordant , it domiciliatenot be prevented that it would be imposing policies in a demeanor or other . As a result , the minority w ho opposed the passageway of the arbiter atomic number 18 imposed on . Conflicts that would arise from such instances and lasts of the ECJ ar difficult to ignore . The legislation in the EU is not symbolic nor simplistic . It matters to the inherent body comprising it , filled with many actors from issue governments . Therefore , the junctureal(a) nature of the EU policy process is quite transp flex (Richardson , 2001 :6Obviously questions of power are still important . But for a host of policy initiatives under engagen in the last twenty years it is all but impossible to identify clearly who the prevailing actors are . Who is controlling those actions that go to make up our interior(a) policy on abortions , or on income redistribution , or consumer enemy , or energy ? Looking for the few who are powerful we tend to overlook the many whose webs of influence provoke and happen the exercise of power These webs and confusing welfare policies that defy been und ertaken in recent years (Heclo , 1978 :102Differentia! l Impacts of European Policy-MakingIt has always been explained that the purpose of an merged system of policy-making among member states of the European Union is for the comparative deepening , harmonization , and convergence . However , some look at that it is sooner the contrary that happens . Heritier et al (2002 :1 ) proposed that a European policy has relative impacts across compound nation states operate to the Union . There is a differential impact among the responses of the states repayable to the requirements of European policies . This represents a variegated process of change , both great and small . However , the extent of this variation is highly dependent on the states preexisting policies and the political process in which these policies are subjected . Therefore , the adjustment of hold policies is needed , as thither is a discrepancy between the demands of issue policies and delineate European policy (Heritier et al 2002 :1Legal Integration in the Euro pean CommunityThe formation of a binding good system that encompasses all member states of the European Union is otherwise termed as efficacious integration This is a result of the collaborating efforts of three decision-makers the litigants , subject judiciarys , and the European philander of Justice . The three bodies wipe out a certain causal relationship that allows for the generation of demand and supply for the vital take ination of the European Community s set of reasoned philosophys . The litigants have an economic stake cod to lack of integration . fundamentally they are the main cause of the demand for the opinion of virtue and their primary recipients . But this demand is only put inive when matter accosts subject themselves to the ECJ , which is considered the source of ultimate supply (Tridimas and Tridimas , 2001 :1The companionship truth has evolved throughout the years , and this transformation is highly evident in the change of inter internal tre aties into a supra-national constitutional system of ! governance . This thus implies that member states would have to crock up up a meaning(a) part of their sovereignty . The Treaty of Rome did not include the formation of a body that would function equivalent to a Supreme Court that would be tasked to hear appeals on incases among national taps . Since the European Community is not a league and instead a supranational entity , it is natural that it has an open-ended combinatorial latent But those who authored the Treaty essentialed to ensure that thither is a uniform enforcement of the Community righteousness among member nations Therefore , it take ins the certificate of the rule of court-orderedity and the promotion of equal preaching among citizens . With this measure interpretation of sub judiceity , the community rear prevent the distortions of ambition and promotes economic efficiency (Tridimas and Tridimas 2001 :2This said unifying legal power is depute to the European Court of Justice through the condition 234 of the European Union . This empowers the ECJ to decide on the interpretation and severity of community right ` phrase 234 states that , where a question of Community law is raised out front a national chat up or tribunal , that court or tribunal may , if it considers that a decision on the question is incumbent to enable it to give judgment , bay the ECJ to translate a opinion . This expression provides that , where a question of Community law is raised in the beginning a national court against whose decision thither is no judicial remedy , that court must bring the matter ahead the ECJ . Thus , Article 234 draws a distinction between lower national courts , which have a discretion to make a put forwardence , and national courts of final instance , which are under an obligation to refer (Tridimas and Tridimas , 2001 :2The European Court of JusticeThe European Court of Justice (ECJ ) is the replica of a Supreme Court in the European Union . It is responsible for de cision-making concerning legal matters under the foun! ding Treaties . The ECJ may nurture cases from the Commission , the European fan tan , member governments , nationals of member states , or foreign entities . It has the mandate to interpret the provisions indicated in the treaties sign(a) by the member states and to action the policies agreed upon by the EU nations (Ahearn , 2002 :5This court has a polar role in the policy-making decisions of the European Union particularly on matter in the assignment of powers between the Commission and member states in different issues areas . It resolves the issues of competence in which it slight that the trade in goods is under the exclusive competence of the EU , however , investments do remains within the competence of the member states . In 1994 , the request of the Commission for the extension of competence for goods to services and intellectual property was rejected by the ECJ . By belief that such areas of mixed competence are subjected to the principle of congruity the leverag e of the Commission was reduced , thereby decreasing the competence of the member states during internal bargaining on the EU localisation (Ahearn , 2002 :6The ECJ passes decision on cases forwarded to it and provides the ruling to the national court . The ECJ has a deeply internalized concepts of justice also enforced by opine which reflects its own set of policies . This court does not appreciate the tip overing of its ruling by the political-legislative political science , and rejection by nations individual courts . The cooperation of national courts is very crucial in the maintenance of the entire structure of the European Union . The ECJ does have perceptivenesss towards policies and it is independent of partisan or national interests . This recognizes the influence and the significance of this court in the policy-making agenda and offspring of the European Union . On the other quite a little , in matters concerning setting of power , the ECJ cannot pop out legislation . Its only power is to rule on cases brought before ! it . Therefore , this results to its part of negatively integrated policy-making due to its primary function of removing and dismantling national restrictions to basic license of movement . On the other hand , its role in positive integration is that it constructs supranational rules of contain instead of national legislation (Tridimas and Tridimas 2001 :12The earlier ruling system was transformed into a means to enforce EC law , which reflects the official indecorum of the ECJ from the individual courts of member states . The ECJ offers the empowerment of individuals and companies in challenging national laws , giving this court the privilege of move its nearly policies . This simultaneously accomplishes the reduction of its addiction to the different governments of the cooperating countries and the Commission to raise onslaught cases (Tridimas and Tridimas , 2001 :13The autonomy of the ECJ is already established , however its practice of pursuing its own policy objectives is the next issue . Tridimas and Tridimas (2001 :13 ) borrowed the economic theory of principal-agent relation . Here , the ECJ plays the role of the agent that was delegated by the sovereign states (principals ) to be an authority in facilitating transnational cooperation among states of the EC . This is accomplished through the interpretation of their legislated laws and policies that govern their relationship . However , with the power vested on this administration in to serve its purpose , it becomes independent and can serve its own interests by prioritizing its policies than those of the principals . In practice , this takes the form of advancing pro-integration policies that would not have been the preference nor the favor of some member countries (Borras and Jacobson , 2004 :202Still continuing with the analogy , this innovation as an action can limit its losses through the employment of various mechanisms . There are sanctions imposed in to minimize dresser losses which includes cypher cuts , retrenchment or dismissal of! force out , non compliance with the decision of the post , and the introduction of a invention legislation with the purpose to overturn the decision of the agency and even a change of the charter of the agency . However , there are limitations on metier of the enforcement of these sanctions relative to the ECJ Examples are that the budget cuts could lead to the undermining of the institution s adjudication role . Another is that national governments are not tending(p) the power to dismiss decide who are appointed for terms of six years . In cases when a government does not select with given policies , it is singled out as a non-cooperative player . And near of all , reversal of the decision of the court is definitely not an option for member nations (Tridimas and Tridimas , 2001 :14Responsibilities of the CourtSince the primary function of the Court of Justice is to attend on cases brought before it , the following are the about common types encountered by the ECJ : prem ier(prenominal) is the advance ruling social occasion next is the proceedings for visitation to effect an obligation consequently there are actions for repeal and last is actions for chastisement to act . The forward ruling procedure is necessary to prevent the natural interpretation of the EU law by the different courts across member states . In cases of head on the part of the national court regarding the interpretation or validity of an EU law , this necessitates the court to solicit the advice of the Court of Justice . Hence , this is advice is granted by the Court in the form of a preliminary ruling . When a member nation fails to follow what was agreed upon in treaties and what was stated in the EU law , thusly the Commission can initiate the proceedings for mischance to fulfill an obligation . This right is also reserved for other EU countries affected by this failure . In both cases an probe on the allegations to the accused are conducted where a judgment is bas ed upon .

If a member state is found guilty or at fault then measures against it are taken to forebode the issue . Fines can be imposed on member states that do not comply with the court s judgment work ons for revocation are make in cases when any of the nations that belong to the Union , the Commission , or fantan have the belief that a certain law of the EU is illegal . A supplication to annul the law can be submitted . This case is also used by semiprivate individuals in to protest a particular law and trigger it due to direct and untoward effects on them . The court may declare that a law is null and untenanted in cases when the law is not properly adopted or does not comply with the Treaties The quarter around common case is actions for failure to act . to a lower place various circumstances , the Treaty allows and even needed the European Parliament , the Council and the Commission to make decision . But in the event that they fail to fulfill this function , the member states , other institutions and even individuals or companies can a complaint to the Court against this failure and officially degrade this action (European Union , 2007Organization of the work at Done by the European Court of JusticeThe registry accepts the cases d by complainants to which specific judge and advocate-general are both delegate . There are slackly two stages in the process : the written and the oral phase . The written stage involves the debut of written statements subjected for the judge s refresh in to draw a summary report to provide a background to the case . The oral phase is done through a public hearing . Relative to the splendour and complexity of the case , the hearing could be conducted in the social move! ment of three , tailfin , 13 or even of a full court . During the hearing , the parties lawyers present their cases before the judges and the advocate-general who can also conduct the questioning . The advocate-general can then express his or her opinion . After this , judges conduct a unhurriedness and delivery their verdict . This does not necessitate that the advocate-general s opinion is to be followed , it is only considered . Since the year 2003 , advocate generals are only required to give their opinions in instances where a radical point of law is raised . The judgment passed by the Court is a result of a majority s decision and is pronounce at a public hearing . Opinions of dissent are not welcomed nor evince and decisions are published on the mean solar sidereal day that the verdict is passed (European Union , 2007The European Court of Justice and exclusive Legal SystemsThere is evidently a case of diverging national and European legal systems . This is a complica ted matter as the task of establishing a common set of principles adaptable to any member state is at and . The principles are needed to be in accordance to the incorporation of all the legal systems of the states admitted into the institution . It is rather difficult to compare which administrative law is to be used and which is not . Despite the complex nature of this matter , the ECJ has been successful in reconciling the different set of policies among states . A case law demonstrates that the Court was able to accomplish the supposition of specific ideas and principles of British legal concepts into the European administrative law . There is a synthesis common law standards and principles of Continental administrative law . Another case demonstrated that there is a middle ground in settling legal impediments . The well-known AM-S case encountered by the court was a matter of an anti-dumping case on whitethorn 7 , 1991 . The tune of estoppel derived from the Anglo-American legal tradition has not direct equivalent in Europe .! The ECJ responded by synthesizing the legal argument of estoppel into preexisting legal concepts and notions at the community level . This evidently illustrates that the ECJ has every intention of adequately integrating concepts of national law and use this for the promotion of the most countenance standard of civil rights tax shelter and procedural guarantees in Community Law (Schwarze 1992 :687Another controversial case confront by the ECJ is the annulment of information plug with the get unneurotic States . On May 2006 , the Court has voided the deal between the European Union and the United States in requiring airlines to transfer passenger selective information to the US authorities . According to the Court , this selective information transfer has no appropriate legal soil , as it includes information regarding credit fluff details and addresses . The US claimed that this system would assist the identification of potential difference terrorists . Despite the decisio n , both EU and US officials are optimistic that a solution is available and can be found that would enable this transfer of information to push through . Demands stipulated in this proposal include the sending of European airlines to US authorities 34 items of individualised information on the include passengers after 15 minutes of take-off . America threatened that it would implement fines and would not allow the landing of airlines that would refuse to comply to this agreement . The US officials furthered by saying that in cases that the information asked were not sent in advance , the passengers would be subjected to long , therefore inconvenient , examen from hostage fit outs on arrival terminals . ascribable to the 9 /11 outrages America has demanded a more stringent security check by the airlines worldwide , as this attack was perpetrated through the use of hijacked airplanes as means to destroy key buildings in novel York and Washington The European Parliament howev er debated on the failure of the US in providing guar! antees that adequate levels of information protection would be enforced and that the very process of submitting the personal information of the passengers would debauch their right to privacy . This is the reason that the European Union petitioned the European Court of Justice to annul the deal . This said argument however was not considered by the court and instead backbreaking its decision through the examination of legal basis of data transfer . It argued that the EU Data shelter Directive , which was the basis of the decision made by the European Union and the European Commission in accepting the data collection , did not apply to data requested for security reasons Johannes Laitenberger , chief interpreter of the European Commission said that the ruling ensure that there is no lowering of data protection standards , no effect on passengers , no disruption of transatlantic air trading , and that a high level of security is maintained until 30 September . The Commission is committed to works with all parties compound to find an appropriate arrangement by that time (BBC intelligence service program , 2006ConclusionThe European Court of Justice is a body that is highly essential in the implementation of the agreements stipulated in the Treaties signed by member states . It is very esteemed and its power is accept and must never be undermined . Its decisions are seek and are not contested , as it is the branch that serves to rule over disputes among concerned parties whether it be between nations , individuals , or even companies It has a very significant role in the policy-making of the European Union member nations as it ensures that these countries would abide by what they have promised to do . It is the final court to be consulted in rendition laws and implementing them , which consolidates a group of nations with individual identities and systems of governance BibliographyAhearn , R .J . 2002 . handicraft Policymaking in the European Union I nstitutional Framework[Online] . [December 23 , 2007]! . operating(a) from universe Wide WebBinder , D .S . 1995 . The European Court of Justice and the Protection of Fundamental Rights inthe European Community : New Developments and upcoming Possibilities in Expanding Fundamental Rights Review to Member State Action [online] [December 23 , 2007] . usable from introduction Wide Webp Borras , S , Jacobsson , K . 2004 . The method of co-ordination and new governance patterns in theEU . ledger of European Public Policy [Online] . 11 (2 ) [December 23 2007] , pp . 185-208 . procurable from World Wide WebHeclo , H . 1978 . Issue Networks and the Executive system in King Anthony (ed .The NewAmerican Political System . Washington DC : American Enterprise Institute .Heritier , A , Kerwer , D , Knill , C , Lehmkuhl , D , Teutsch , M Douillet , A (2001Differential Europe . Maryland : Rowman and LittlefieldHix , S . 1999 : The political system of the European Union . Basingstoke MacmillanJeremy , Richardson (ed . 2001 . European Union : indicator and Policy-making ThirdEdition . Oxford : RoutledgePollack , M .A . 2000 . The End of Creeping competence ? EU Polcy-Making Since MaastrichtJournal of Common Market Studies [Online] . 38 (3 ) [December 23 , 2007] pp . 519-38 . Available from World Wide WebRadaelli , C . 2003 : The Europeanisation of public policy . In Featherstone , K and Radelli , C(eds . The Politics of Europeanisation . Oxford : Oxford University PressRamussen , H . 1985 . On Law and Policy in the European Court of Justice Leiden : BrillSchwarze , J , European administrative law (1992 , Sweet Maxwell LondonTridimas , G , Tridimas , T . 2001 . interior(a) courts and the European Court of Justice : A publicchoice synopsis of the preliminary reference procedure . Journal of Economic publications classification [Online] . [December 23 , 2007] , pp 1-14 . Available from World Wide WebBBC News . 2006 [Online] . [December 23 , 2007] . Available from World Wide Web Europa . 2007 [Online] . [December 23 , 2 007] . Available from World Wide WebThe Columbia Ency! clopedia . 2004 . s .v . European Union , 6th ed .. 16140PAGE 18 ...If you want to get a full essay, order it on our website: BestEssayCheap.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: cheap essay