
Available in Russian
Author: Olga Kadysheva
DOI: 10.21128/1812-7126-2024-2-4-18
Keywords: parliamentary control; European Union; Eurasian Economic Union; role of national parliaments; “democratic deficit”; principle of subsidiarity; early warning system
The need for effective parliamentary oversight at the level of an integration association as a whole is becoming increasingly acute. National parliaments within the framework of the integration process are not part of the institutional system of the European Union or the Eurasian Economic Union and cannot participate in the rule-making process at the Union level. They also cannot control the executive authorities of the EU and the EAEU with regard to issues transferred to the level of the Union, thus falling into de facto isolation in integration processes and becoming a kind of “victim of integration”. A solution to this problem of “democratic deficit” seen in the exclusion of national parliaments from EU and EAEU legislative processes could be the creation of a system of additional (subsidiary) control by national parliaments of the acts of bodies of the integration association, in aa search for balance between the guarantee of independent and effective rule-making activity by institutions of the association and the preservation of a certain degree of significant influence of national legislative bodies over legislative processes. In the EU this “democratic deficit” was overcome by the creation of the European Parliament. This body is elected by the population instead of by the European Assembly, which was practically deprived of real powers. It was also overcome by fixing at the level of EU treaties the procedure for joint adoption of normative acts by the EU Council and the European Parliament. In turn, the alienation of national parliaments from the process of adopting normative acts at the EU level, resulting from these large-scale transfer of powers to the EU level, was partially mitigated by creating special procedures for national parliaments’ participation in the adoption of normative acts at the level of the Union. At the EAEU level, there is in principle no representative body in the Union’s institutions, nor are there any procedures for involving national parliaments in adoption of normative acts by the Union’s institutions. This can be explained by the fact that Eurasian integration is at the initial stage of formation. However, we can confidently say that as Eurasian integration develops further, the need for parliamentary control in both its dimensions — at the level of the Union and at the level of national parliaments — will be felt more acutely.
About the author: Olga Kadysheva – Candidate of Sciences (Ph.D.) in Law, Associate Professor, Department of International Law, Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia .
Citation: Kadysheva O. (2024) Rol' parlamentskogo kontrolya v obespechenii effektivnogo funktsionirovaniya institutov ES i EAES [The role of parliamentary control in ensuring the effective functioning of EU and EAEU institutions]. Sravnitel'noe konstitutsionnoe obozrenie, vol.33, no.2, pp.4–18. (In Russian).
References
Brewster R., Chilton A. (2014) Supplying Compliance: Why and When the United States Complies with WTO Rulings. Yale Journal of International Law, vol.39, pp.201–246.
Chatzistavrou F., Papanikolaou K. (2020) Revising the Early Warning System to Reinforce the “Third Chamber” of EU Multi-Level Law-Making. In: Blockmans S., Russack S. (eds.) Deliberative Democracy in the EU: Countering Populism with Participation and Debate, Brussels: CEPS, pp.169–186.
Cygan A. (2021) Participation by National Parliaments in the EU Legislative Process. ERA Forum, vol.22, pp.421–435.
Follesdal A., Hix S. (2006) Why There Is a Democratic Deficit in the EU: A Response to Majone and Moravcsik. Journal of Common Market Studies, vol.44, no.3, pp.533–562.
Ispolinov А.S. (1994). Dogovor o Evropeyskom Soyuze: novye polnomochiya Evroparlamenta [Treaty on European Union: new powers for the European Parliament]. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 11: Pravo, no.1, pp.121–129. (In Russian).
Jancic D. (2015) The Game of Cards: National Parliaments in the EU and the Future of the Early Warning Mechanism and the Political Dialogue. Common Market Law Review, vol.52, no.4, pp.939–975.
Kalinichenko P., Petrov R. (2016) On Similarities and Differences of the European Union and Eurasian Economic Union Legal Orders: Is There the “Eurasian Economic Union Acquis”? Legal Issues of Economic Integration, vol.43, no.3, pp.295–307.
Kohler M. (2014) European Governance and the European Parliament: From Talking Shop to Legislative Powerhouse. Journal of Common Market Studies, vol.52, no.3, pp.600–615.
Rittberger B. (2003) The Creation and Empowerment of the European Parliament. Journal of Common Market Studies, vol.41, no.2, pp.203–225.
Saidov A.Kh. (2006). Formirovanie mezhdunarodnogo parlamentskogo prava [Formation of international parliamentary law]. Moskovskiy zhurnal mezhdunarodnogo prava, no.3, pp.17–41. (In Russian).
Sieberson S.C. (2007) The Treaty of Lisbon and Its Impact on the European Union’s Democratic Deficit. Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1628869 (accessed: 28.05.2024).