The Puzzle of Transparency Reforms in the Council of the EU

Daniel Naurin

doi:10.17645/pag.v5i3.941

Abstract

I argue that the transparency reforms that have been implemented in the Council of the EU in the last decades are unlikely to change the perception of the Council as a non-transparent institution. My argument is based on three distinctions: the distinction between transparency (availability of information) and publicity (spread and reception of information); between transparency in process and transparency in rationale; and between plenary and committee decision-making arenas in legislatures. While national parliaments tend to have all these features, the Council of the EU only has two (transparency in process and committee decision-making). As a consequence, publishing ever more documents and detailed minutes of committee meetings is unlikely to strengthen the descriptive legitimacy of the Council. Furthermore, I argue that the democratic transparency problem is the reverse of what is most often argued: It is not the lack of transparency that causes a democratic deficit, but the (perceived) lack of a democratic infrastructure that makes more serious transparency reforms unthinkable to government representatives.

Highlights

Issue This commentary is part of the issue “EU Institutional Politics of Secrecy and Transparency in Foreign Affairs”, edited by Vigjilenca Abazi and Johan Adriaensen (Maastricht University, The Netherlands)
Over the last two decades the Council of the EU has implemented a range of transparency reforms and rules, some of which are more radical than the rules that exist in national parliaments
What does the Council have to do in order to be transparent, if publishing documents and broadcasting deliberations is not enough? What is wrong with the Council compared to national, democratic legislatures when it comes to transparency?

Summary

Introduction

Issue This commentary is part of the issue “EU Institutional Politics of Secrecy and Transparency in Foreign Affairs”, edited by Vigjilenca Abazi and Johan Adriaensen (Maastricht University, The Netherlands). Transparency in process refers to information on actions, such as deliberations, negotiations, and votes, that took place among decision makers and directly fed into the decision.

Results

Conclusion