Conclusions on the 'Proceduralisation' of EU Law Through the Backdoor

Abstract

Despite the limited procedural competence of the EU, there has been a bourgeoning of initiatives and rules placing emphasis on judicial enforcement and remedies across several EU policies, such as those relating to competition law, the free movement of workers, environment, consumers and data protection. The questions arising as a result of these legislative initiatives is whether and to what extent a process of ‘incidental proceduralisation’ of EU law is taking place and is legitimate. The six contributions compiled in this Special Issue seek to critically examine the process of incidental proceduralisation by looking at which procedural rules have been introduced, their rationale, coherence within the policy field as well as perceived usefulness for the application of the substantive EU law provisions they were enacted to serve. On the basis of these sectoral analyses, this paper seeks to draw general observations on the dynamics and characteristics of this incidental proceduralisation process. It concludes that the legitimacy of the proceduralisation process has not yet been significantly called into question. Furthermore, despite the wide variety of rules examined, it is possible to identify general trends in the way the EU initiates or supports changes in enforcement or litigation cultures.