European Union Decision-making Process Research Articles

Critical discourse analysis of hate speech from a linguistic perspective

The present study is concerned with the analysis of hate speech – an offensive discourse, which is harmful to democracy and to the members of targeted groups and/or individuals, whose inherent characteristics or public image is threatened. It seems reasonable to assume that the democratic and peace-loving world has been astounded by the offensive language often used by Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, a NATO leader and a representative of a European Union (EU) member state. Therefore, a speech by Hungarian Prime Minister V. Orbán (2022) delivered at the Bálványos Free Summer University and Student Camp on 23 July 2022, with an approximate research corpus of 9 000 words, has been selected as an object of the linguistic study. This speech has been referred to as a “racist tirade” (Coakley 2022), and European Parliament political group leaders have condemned his “openly racist declarations”, breaching the EU values (EU Parliament Press Room 2022), to mention but a few reactions to the speech. This is even more alarming at present in the context of Russia’s war against Ukraine, when Prime Minister V. Orbán’s pro-Russian stance subverts the EU’s fundamental values and hinders the EU decision-making process. The study employed InfraNodus and Wmatrix methodology for the thematic analysis, the analysis of keyness at the word, part of speech and semantic domain level focusing on the three aspects of discursive proximization that provide for the discussion on the ideological schism in the discourse space. The results of a micro-linguistic level study of the speech indicate that from the perspective of its form, the hate speech under analysis demonstrates Prime Minister V. Orbán’s rather uncompromising stance towards the events being referred to, as well as his attitude towards the prospective action, which might be taken by the target audience. As a result, the qualitative research findings demonstrate that the hate speech under analysis exhibits the features of offensive discourse, created by means of context-dependent linguistic realizations.

Spanish public image of the EU regional policy

The article is devoted to the analysis of the perception of European integration and the regional policy of the European Union (EU) among the citizens of modern Spain. Particular attention is paid to the comparison of periods before the COVID-19 pandemic (2019) and after it (October 2021). The purpose of this paper is to identify the opinion of Spanish society on the EU regional policy. The first part of the article presents the analytical framework of the study. The second part describes its methodology. The third part analyzes the opinion polls in Spain, conducted by Eurobarometer. According to the Eurobarometer database, on the one hand, the author notes despite the pandemic, citizens positively assess the impact of the European Union bodies on their everyday life. On the other hand, the pandemic has shown that the states are key actors in the EU decision-making process. The initiative to shape the development of the EU's regional policy still belongs to the Member States, but not to the regions and/or supranational bodies. The scientific significance of the article is that the results of Eurobarometer public opinion polls are generalized. This is the first time when this approach has been used in the study of this topic.

Emotions in the European Union's decision-making: the reform of the Dublin System in the context of the refugee crisis

The European Union's decision-making process has mostly been pictured as a technocratic and consensual process with little or no place for the logics of passion. The reform of the Dublin System in the wake of the refugee crisis (2015–16) has been analyzed from different angles but not from a political psychology perspective in which emotions are fully taken into account. Crises are often seen as a window of opportunity because key players engage in a strategic process of sense-making. This article explores the role of emotions in this process: to what extent do emotions – seen via crisis-framing processes – contribute to the understanding of the reform of the Dublin System? To this purpose, I show first how emotions are related to crisis-framing efforts. Second, I discuss how the study of emotions contributes to the understanding of decision-making processes. I carry out a critical-frame analysis illustrated by a systematic qualitative content analysis of primary documentation. Data include European Parliament debates on the topic of the refugee crisis (covering also the points of view of the Commission and the Council), and policy documents and speeches by the main actors in the decision-making process, including relevant member states and non-governmental organizations.

Does Politicization Matter? Small States in East-Central Europe and the Brexit Negotiations

The integration process is increasingly politicized across the member states of the European Union (EU). While this phenomenon has been analyzed from many perspectives, this article aims to look at a so far neglected aspect—how increased levels of politicization of the EU might have impacted on the role small states play in the EU decision-making process. Using the case of Brexit negotiations, the article starts from the hypothesis that higher levels of politicization could increase the influencing capacity of smaller states. As national sovereignty concerns may become more relevant due to politicization, it can be expected that small states become more active in EU-level negotiations, especially in cases where the future of the integration is also at stake. However, looking at the cases of Czechia, Hungary, Slovakia, and Slovenia, the article concludes that the behavior of these countries is still determined by their small-state character. Interestingly, different levels of EU politicization did not determine their bargaining strategies in Brexit negotiations. Consequently, while we see a slight variation in the level of engagement, the article argues that the influencing capacity of the member states under scrutiny was mainly driven by their small state characteristics.

Sejm i Senat wobec wyzwań Unii Europejskiej

The article’s goal is to present the consequences of Polish membership in the European Union (EU) for the functioning of the Polish Sejm and Senate at the national and international level. Polish accession to the European Union resulted in changes to the scope of competences of certain organs of the Republic of Poland. This was related to the transfer of specific state competences to an international organization and it applied, in particular, to the Polish Parliament (the Sejm and Senate) which has lost its primary role as legislator of laws applicable in Poland. In order to avoid the marginalization of national parliaments in the EU decision-making process, appropriate legal measures have been introduced at the national and international level. Additionally, after the Treaty of Lisbon entered into force, national parliaments have received new competences which allowed them to exist on the forum of the European Union. The article puts forward the thesis that the Polish Sejm and Senate have lost their position as main legislative bodies at the national level but, at the same time, they have acquired a new European function which can neither be qualified as traditionally understood legislative nor controlling functions.

Stuck in the Logic of Oslo: Europe and the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

This article addresses the crucial question of why European policies in the IsraeliPalestinian arena have remained contradictory and partly counterproductive. It suggests that European policies are stuck in the (no longer pertinent) logic of the Oslo process to achieve a two-state solution. The reasons for this stasis include the peculiarities of the European Union's decision-making process, lack of consensus within the international community on any alternative framework, and Europe's prioritization of stability in its "neighborhood."

The UK Brexit Referendum: A Catalyst to Reform the European Union Institutional Architecture in Tax Matters?

The results of the UK referendum in favour of leaving the European Union (EU) clearly put into question the European economic and political project as well as its institutional structure. This article argues that the Brexit may be a momentum to reform the institutional structure and procedural rules through which tax policy is made at the EU level. The UK referendum is indeed unlikely to further slow down the EU harmonization process in tax matters, which has always followed a tortuous path. Instead, the Brexit may give momentum to reform major weaknesses of the EU institutional and decision-making process in tax matters, in particular the unanimity rule and the role of the European Parliament. Finally, with regard to taxation specifically, the establishment of an EU tax, providing the EU with sufficient genuine own resource, could also reinforce EU’s legitimacy by countering the criticisms related to Member States’ contribution to the European budget.

Evidence based policy making in the European Union: the role of the scientific community

In the times when the acquis of the European Union (EU) has developed so far as to reach a high level of technical complexity, in particular in certain policy fields such as environmental legislation, it is important to look at what kind of information and data policy decisions are based on. This position paper looks at the extent to which evidence-based decision-making process is being considered in the EU institutions when it comes to adopting legislation in the field of environment at the EU level. The paper calls for closer collaboration between scientists and decision-makers in view of ensuring that correct data is understood and taken into consideration when drafting, amending, negotiating and adopting new legal texts at all levels of the EU decision-making process. It concludes that better awareness of the need for such collaboration among the decision-makers as well as the scientific community would benefit the process and quality of the final outcomes (legislation).

Is There a Real Model in Spain for Autonomous Communities to Participate in the Council of the European Union or Is It Only a Mirage?

Since December 2004 the Autonomous Communities have been able to form a part of the Spanish Delegation in the Council of European Union. Specifically, in the Conference on Affairs Related to the European Union (Conferencia para Asuntos Relacionados con la Unión Europea, CARUE). In December 2004, the CARUE adopted two agreements to regulate the participation of the Autonomous Communities in some of the Council formations and its preparatory bodies. This article analyses whether there really is a system of participation for the Spanish regions before the Council and preparatory bodies, or whether it is merely a mirage. To answer the above question, we should consider two areas: first, the participation process of the Autonomous Communities in the preparatory bodies—the Working Parties and the Permanent Representatives Committee; second, the Autonomous Communities direct representation on the Spanish Delegation in some configurations of the Council. The application of these agreements has been a little confusing and subject to change depending on the configurations of the Council. The initial starting point was that greater involvement of the Autonomous Communities in the European Union decision-making process would strengthen the internal cohesion of the State. However, the extent of that involvement, far from being consensual, appears as a difficulty. At present, despite some attempts to isolate European affairs from other controversial issues regarding the Spanish territorial model, it is mixed in practice. In fact, the current model, instead of contributing to the cohesion between administrations, is an additional source of dispute.

Regions and Subsidiarity in the European Union: A Look at the Role of the Spanish and other Regional Parliaments in the Monitoring of Compliance with the Principle of Subsidiarity

European regions have had a limited involvement in the European Union decision-making process, despite having an important role in the implementation of EU acts. The principle of subsidiarity, as established in the Treaty of Lisbon, has acquired an important regional dimension, which results in the possibility of the regional parliaments playing a role in the law-making process in the European Union for the first time. However, the internal mechanism set up in Spain narrows the possible scope of involvement of the regional parliaments, subordinating it to the national Parliament's will and even placing the regional governments in a similar position as the legislatures.

Situation actuelle de la fièvre catarrhale ovine en Europe et dans le bassin méditerranéen

In the past, only sporadic incursions of bluetongue (BT) occurred, mainly in Southern Europe. The disease showed a tendency to disappear naturally, probably because the necessary climatic, environmental and entomological conditions to ensure virus spread and persistence did not occur. The situation has how­ever changed dramatically in the last decade. Until three years ago, the disease mainly affected the Mediterranean Basin. Since fall 2006 new serotypes have emerged and the unprecedented spread of BTV-1 and BTV-8 caused outbreaks in many countries of the European Union (EU). The EU Commission responded to the changing BT disease situ­ation by developing continuous finely-tuned EU-legislation in close cooperation with EU Member States, and by allocating funding to implement vaccination programmes in the States. EU rules on BT are highly influenced by changes in the disease situ­ation, experiences in the Member States, results of the ongoing data gathering, and research on BT disease and its vectors. The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) is the risk assessor and produces scientific opinions and advice to provide a sound basis for European policies and legislation. Also, the EU Commission has ensured considerable financial support to the vaccination programmes that have been put in place in several Member States for the years 2007 and 2008. Community rules on BT lay down general provisions for the control and eradication of BT, as well as detailed rules on disease control, monitoring, surveillance and restrictions on movements of susceptible animals. All BT outbreaks must be notified by EU Member States to the Animal Disease Notification System (ADNS). In addition, information that has been gathered in the course of implementing BT monitoring and/or surveillance programmes must be transmitted to BT-Net system. Monthly, six-monthly and annual reports are required. Data and maps can be viewed on BT-Net:http://eubtnet.izs.it/btnet/reports/ EpidemiologicalSituation.html The Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health (SCoFCAH) plays a key role in the EU decision-making process. Representatives of EU Member States meet on a monthly basis with the European Commission. Updates on the epidemiological situation of BT (and other animal diseases) are presented by the Member States (presentations are available on SANCO web­page). The EU Commission consults SCoFCAH on new proposals for an opinion after which the measure can be formally adopted in accordance with the appropriate procedure. With the support of the Member States experts in the technical working groups and the representatives at SCoFCAH, Regulation (EC) No 1266/2007 has been amended several times to respond better to the evolving disease situation. Together with appropri­ate surveillance and restrictions on animal movements, mass vaccination of all susceptible and reachable animals in the restricted zones with all available vaccines is currently the pre­ferred option as regards effective BT control.

The Role of Interest Groups in the European Union Decision-Making Process

Most of the economic models that analyse the behaviour of interest groups in the policy making process uphold the idea that there are many organized groups that compete, with the aim of achieving their individual goals. The adoption of decisions is the result of a complex system of strategic interactions, and since different groups have different resources at their disposal this makes it easier for one or more groups to influence whether or not a policy is adopted. This research demonstrates that an institutional system such as the European Union (EU) should be able to protect us from the potential manipulation, which accompanies these channels of influence.

The 'Legislative Backbone' keeping the Institution upright? The Role of European Parliament Committees in the EU Policy-Making Process

Over the past five decades the European Parliament (EP) has moved from being a largely consultative assembly to being a genuine co-legislature. The growth in the EP?s powers was accompanied by a revaluation of its Standing Committees. It is in these committees, the backbone of the EP, that scrutiny of European Union (EU) legislation takes place. As in the US Congress the real work of the Parliament is done in its committees. They have become a key element in the EU policy-making process and make vital contributions to the shaping of legislation. Although these committees play such a major role in the EP, they have rarely been the subject of empirical inquiries. This paper, which is part of a wider project studying the role of committees, intends to fill this gap. In an examination of how legislative acts have been processed by such committees on the basis of interviews and documentary analysis, this paper focuses on the following main questions: 1. How do EP committees operate? 2. How do they interact with other institutions within the EU system of governance? 3. How do they affect the link to the EU citizen? From an analytical perspective answers to these questions are important as they help us to understand some characteristics of the EU decision-making process. From a normative perspective our research also tries to answer the question of whether EP committees help increase the EP's accountability to EU citizens.

Institutional Reform and Decision-Making Efficiency in the European Union

tional reform. ince the 1970s, legislative activity of the European Union (EU) has expanded greatly in both scale and scope.' The number of legislative acts adopted by the EU per year increased from less than 300 in the mid-1970s to more than 500 in the mid-1980s. At the same time, the EU gradually extended its competencies to issue areas not explicitly covered by the Treaties of Rome, such as consumer protection, research and development, and the environment. This continuous expansion of EU legislative activity has been accompanied by periodic changes of the EU's institutional framework. The Single European Act (1987) introduced qualified majority voting for a number of policy areas and provided the European Parliament with the ability to influence legislative outcomes. The Treaty on European Union (1993) extended the use of qualified majority voting and strengthened the role of the Parliament in the legislative process. In this article, we analyze whether institutional reform has enabled the EU to deal efficiently with an expanding legislative agenda. A common theme in the literature is that the efficiency of the EU decision-making process has deteriorated considerably as EU legislative activity has increased over the past two decades. A number of studies suggest that the Council is unable to cope with the Commission's legislative output (Scharpf 1988; Sbragia 1993; Dehousse 1995). Other studies point to a dilution in the substantive content of EU legislation (Van den Bos 1994; Heritier 1996; Scharpf 1997). The most common suggestion is that the EU decisionmaking process has become inordinately slow, suffering from an excessive

High midnight in Brussels: an analysis of the September 1993 council meeting on the GATT Uruguay Round

ABSTRACT Most of the recent theoretical work on the European Union (EU) and the European integration process stresses the erosion of the capacity of the governments of the member states to influence policy decisions. This article analyses a meeting of the Council of Ministers in Brussels in September 1993, the run-up to the meeting and its sequel. At this meeting, the conflict between the Commission and France over an agricultural trade accord negotiated by the Commission and the US in the GATT Uruguay Round came to a head. In effect, this conflict was won, it is argued here, by France, suggesting that the national ‘veto’ or threat of it may still be an effective weapon in the EU. The analysis emphasizes the extent to which the EU decision-making process, in this decisive phase of the Uruguay Round, was dominated by the Franco-German ‘tandem’. The bilateral ‘pre-negotiation’ of EU decisions by Bonn and Paris and the multilateralization of their agreements in the Council are neither ubiquitous in the EU nor limited to the great ‘history-making’ issues. Franco-German bilateralism, where it does function, may constitute an important device for the mediation of conflicts that could otherwise paralyse or slow down the decision-making process.

The Balance between Small and Large: Effects of a Double-Majority System on Voting Power in the European Union

In the beginning of 1995, the European Union (EU) has been enlarged by three countries: Austria, Finland, and Sweden. In view of the implications on the EU's institutional balance and the possible accession of more states in the future, different proposals are currently made to change the system of decision making to one that is more transparent and that more adequately represents member-states' population sizes. The issue will certainly be intensely debated in the framework of the 1996 Review Conference of the Maastricht Treaty. One of the current suggestions aims at establishing a double-majority voting system in the Council of the EU—formerly the Council of Ministers—requiring a majority of both member-states and their populations within that institution. Another one aims at introducing a bicameral system. This article analyzes what effects the resort to a double-majority voting system and the introduction of a bicameral structure would have in terms of the member-states' quantitative influence in the EU's decision-making process. Voting under the double-majority requirement is modeled by a simple game and relative voting power calculated by a (composite) Banzhaf power index.