Delimitation of EU-Competences under the First and Second Pillar: A View BetweenECOWASand the Treaty of Lisbon

Author:

Eisenhut Dominik

Abstract

Since the European Union (EU) agreed upon the extension of its activities to the fields of foreign, security, and criminal policy in the Maastricht Treaty, the question of the delimitation of those new areas of EU competence towards the “classical” policies under the Treaty of the European Community (TEC) has been present. The broad and rather vague scope of the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) in the so-called second pillar of the EU and the area of political cooperation covered by the third pillar presents several uncertainties. One such uncertainty is the relationship between the supranational legal order under the TEC and the more intergovernmental and diplomacy-based cooperation under the Treaty on the European Union (TEU). Although the EU was organized within a single institutional structure, the substantial differences with regard to voting procedures, competences of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) and the role of the European Commission rendered a clear separation of competences under the different pillars compulsory: CFSP remains beyond the jurisdiction of the ECJ; the Commission and the European Parliament have only marginal rights of participation; and the legal obligations under the second pillar cannot claim supremacy over national law or direct effect.

Publisher

Cambridge University Press (CUP)

Subject

Law

Reference76 articles.

1. Missiroli Antonio , Coherence, Effectiveness and Flexibility for CFSP/ESDP, in Europeas ferne Streitmacht 124 (Erich Reiter, Reinhardt Rummel & Peter Schmidt eds., 2002).

2. Pechstein See Matthias , Das Kohärenzgebot als entscheidende Integrationsnorm der Europäischen Union, Europarecht 247 (1995) and Peter-Christian Müller-Graff, Einheit und Kohärenz der Vertragsziele von EG und EU, Europarecht Beiheft 2, 67 (1998) for the dispute regarding the current provisions.

3. See TFEU art. 3(1); see also Alan Dashwood, The Limits of European Community Powers, 21 Eur. L. Rev. 113 (1996) (discussing the scope of exclusive competences).

4. See Wessel supra note 17, at 133 for examples of “PESCialisation” of the TEC-policies within the current legal framework.

5. See Cremona Marise , A Constitutional Basis for Effective External Action? An Assessment of the Provisions on EU External Action in the Constitutional Treaty, EUI Working Paper Law No. 30, 17 (2006) (regarding the equivalent provisions of the Constitutional Treaty).

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. The Sui Generis Nature of External Competences;The Choice of Legal Basis for Acts of the European Union;2018

2. The Regionalization of Development: Are Regional Organizations More Efficient Than States?;SSRN Electronic Journal;2016

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3