Integration through de-legislation? An irritated heckler
AbstractThis paper is about the difficult relationship between law and governance in the European Union. The turn to governance which the Prodi Commission has forcefully propagated is a continuation of much older developments. By means of these developments the European Community (now Union) has sought to compensate for the inadequacies found within its institutional design (in particular, within the Community Method); a design which has had constantly to be adapted to the ever more intense and complex regulatory needs of the integration project. These constant institutional innovations were functional necessities and the turn to governance seems to be irresistible and irreversible. Such innovation, however, is not easily reconcilable with the Union’s commitment to the rule of law, or with the very idea of law-mediated, politically accountable rule. These tensions are addressed in two steps. The first concerns the national level and is a mainly methodological reminder: many of the governing techniques that are today defined as governance can also be found within national systems and were, furthermore, the subject of intensive debate in the 80s within discussion on proceduralizing and reflexive methodologies which sought to capture the specifics of a – then so perceived – post-interventionist law. The second step concerns the European Union. Here, a methodological approach is insufficient. It must instead be accompanied by a re-conceptualisation of European law as a new type of supranational conflict of laws. This law seeks to realize what the Constitutional Treaty had called the “motto of the Union”, namely a reconciliation of “unity and diversity”. It is submitted that a re-conceptualisation of European law in terms of conflict-of-laws would not only help to rescue the rule of law but would also increase our capacity to cope with the unresolved substantive tensions within the European polity.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by CONNEX and EUROGOV networks in its series European Governance Papers (EUROGOV) with number 3.
Date of creation: 17 Jul 2007
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.connex-network.org/
comitology; Europeanization; governance; multilevel governance; open coordination; private international law; rule of law;
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2007-08-08 (All new papers)
- NEP-LAW-2007-08-08 (Law & Economics)
- NEP-REG-2007-08-08 (Regulation)
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Christian Joerges, 2006. "'Deliberative Political Processes' Revisited: What Have we Learnt About the Legitimacy of Supranational Decision-Making," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44, pages 779-802, November.
- Sabel, Charles F.; Zeitlin, Jonathan, 2007. "Learning from Difference: The New Architecture of Experimentalist Governance in the European Union," European Governance Papers (EUROGOV) 2, CONNEX and EUROGOV networks.
- Poul Kjaer, 2007. "Rationality within REACH? On Functional Differentiation as the Structural Foundation of Legitimacy in European Chemicals Regulation," EUI-LAW Working Papers 18, European University Institute (EUI), Department of Law.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Jessica Spiegel) The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Jessica Spiegel to update the entry or send us the correct address.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.