The Lisbon Treaty brought about substantial legal and institutional innovations to the external action of the European Union: In line with the principle of horizontal consistency, the dissertation aims at assessing how the Lisbon changes have affected areas of external actions individually and collectively as well as to what extent these changes have contributed to more consistent external policy. In the beginning of the analysis consistency is discussed as a multi-dimensional concept. The dissertation has focused on two aspects of horizontal consistency – inter-institutional and inter-policy horizontal consistency. Whereas inter-institutional horizontal consistency has focused on achieving synchronisation among the European institutions, inter-policy horizontal consistency is interested in coherent policy-making between the different external action areas, namely the Common Commercial Policy, the Common Foreign and Security Policy, the Common Security and Defence Policy, the development cooperation and the technical assistance with third countries.
Table of Contents
Introduction
1. The Concept of Consistency
1.1. Consistency as a Legal Obligation under the EU Law – a Multi-layered Concept
1.2. Horizontal versus Vertical Consistency
2. Consistency and the Development of the European Union’s External Action
2.1. External Action prior to the Treaty of Lisbon
European Political Cooperation
Treaty of Maastricht and the Introduction of the Common Foreign and Security Policy
Delimitation of Competences between Pillars
The “Unity Thesis” – Relationship between the EC and EU Legal Orders
Consistency in External Action prior to Lisbon
2.2. External Action after the Treaty of Lisbon
2.2.1. Institutional Innovations brought about by the Lisbon Treaty
2.2.2. External action and the Unity of the EU legal order
2.2.3. Components of European Union External Action
3. Consistency in practice: Overlapping External Competences
4. The Duty of Consistency in EU External Action
4.1. Inter-institutional Consistency
4.2. Inter-policy Consistency
Conclusion
Research Objectives and Themes
This dissertation examines the European Union's efforts to enhance the coherence of its foreign policy, specifically focusing on the principle of horizontal consistency following the substantial reforms introduced by the Treaty of Lisbon. The research analyzes how the new legal and institutional framework addresses inter-institutional and inter-policy coordination, aiming to determine whether these changes have effectively reduced contradictions and promoted a more unified external action.
- The evolution of the "consistency" concept within EU law and its transformation into a legal obligation.
- Institutional innovations post-Lisbon, specifically the High Representative, the European External Action Service, and the President of the European Council.
- The impact of de-pillarization on the legal order and the unity of EU external action.
- Practical challenges in delineating external competences, illustrated through the European Neighbourhood Policy and economic sanctions.
Excerpt from the Book
Delimitation of Competences between Pillars
Determining competence delimitation between pillars was a major question on the old Union legal order. One of the potential conflicts between the pillars was the possible overlap between the legal bases that can be used for pursuance of the objectives of the EC and the EU. The necessary demarcation between the EC and the EU competences was governed by Art 47 TEU (pre-Lisbon). Second pillar powers were to be exercised “without prejudice to the powers of the European Community” (ex Art 29 TEU); and nothing in the TEU was to affect the Community Treaties (ex Art 47 TEU). Because of this wording, ex Art 47 TEU is widely read as a collision norm, derogating the application of the lex posterior derogate legi periori rule in relation between the TEC and the TEU. Thus, these provisions (ex Arts 29 and Art 47 TEU) were interpreted to mean that second and third pillar powers should not “encroach upon” Community powers.
A line of cases establish a hierarchical relationship between the Community and the rest of the pillars. In the Airport Transit Visas case, the Commission brought proceedings under Art.230 EC for the annulment of the Council’s Joint Action of 4 March 1996 on airport transit agreements (made under the second pillar). The Commission contended that the Joint Action ought to have been adopted under the then Art100c EC, which gave the Community competence to determine the third countries whose nationals must be in possession of a visa. The Court claimed that the act ought to have been adopted under the appropriate legal basis conferring competence on the Community. The ECJ defined its task under Art.47 as being “to ensure that acts which, according to the Council fall within the scope of …the Treaty on European Union do not encroach upon the powers conferred by the EC Treaty on the Community.” In Environmental Criminal Sanctions, the ECJ found that the Council was in breach of the Art 47 TEU when it enacted a Framework Decision under the third pillar, since the EC had the competence to act under Article 175 TEC.
Summary of Chapters
1. The Concept of Consistency: This chapter analyzes the multi-layered nature of consistency in EU foreign policy and distinguishes between vertical and horizontal dimensions of this principle.
2. Consistency and the Development of the European Union’s External Action: This chapter tracks the historical evolution of EU external action from the early period of European Political Cooperation to the comprehensive institutional reforms introduced by the Lisbon Treaty.
3. Consistency in practice: Overlapping External Competences: This chapter explores how overlapping competences persist in practice, utilizing the European Neighbourhood Policy and economic sanctions as primary case studies.
4. The Duty of Consistency in EU External Action: This chapter evaluates the inter-institutional and inter-policy dimensions of consistency, questioning whether the new framework has truly enhanced effectiveness and coherence.
Keywords
European Union, External Action, Lisbon Treaty, Horizontal Consistency, Inter-institutional Consistency, Inter-policy Consistency, High Representative, European External Action Service, CFSP, CSDP, Common Commercial Policy, Legal Order, Pillar Structure, Competence Delimitation, Coherence.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the fundamental goal of this dissertation?
The dissertation aims to explore the European Union's objective to make its foreign policy more coherent and to analyze how consistency is practically achieved in the areas of inter-institutional and inter-policy cooperation following the Lisbon Treaty reforms.
What are the primary thematic areas covered in the analysis?
The study centers on the legal and institutional frameworks governing EU external action, the transition from the old pillar structure to the Lisbon framework, the specific role of new key actors, and the challenges of managing overlapping competences.
What is the core research question?
The work seeks to answer whether the revamped institutional and legal framework introduced by the Lisbon Treaty has effectively enhanced the consistency and the overall effectiveness of the Union’s external action.
What scientific methodology does the author employ?
The research adopts a legal-analytical approach, examining treaty provisions, evolving case law from the European Court of Justice, and academic commentary to assess the Union’s quest for legal and policy unity.
What does the main body of the work address?
The main body systematically analyzes the evolution of EU foreign policy, the new institutional architecture (High Representative, EEAS, President of the European Council), and provides practical illustrations of competence overlaps in policy areas such as sanctions and neighborhood policy.
Which keywords best characterize the work?
The work is defined by terms such as European Union, Lisbon Treaty, horizontal consistency, inter-institutional and inter-policy consistency, and the evolving legal nature of CFSP.
How does the Lisbon Treaty impact the “pillar structure”?
The Lisbon Treaty formally abolishes the hierarchical pillar structure, introduces a single legal personality for the EU, and attempts to create a more unified legal order, although CFSP retains a unique status subject to specific rules.
How does the author define the role of the High Representative?
The author describes the High Representative as a "double-hatted" institution, bridging the Council and the Commission to act as an overarching coordinator for all EU external policies, though the author highlights potential tensions in this mandate.
What role does the "centre of gravity test" play in this study?
The author discusses this test as a mechanism used by the Court of Justice to determine the correct legal basis for measures where policies might overlap, identifying the test's limitations in the context of complex, multi-objective external actions.
- Quote paper
- Veronika Minkova (Author), 2011, Horizontal Consistency in the European Union External Action, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/179295
