卡内基国际和平基金会-Why-a-Partisan-Commission-President-Would-Be-Bad-for-the-EU_9页_640kb

2014 European Elections: A Partisan Commission President Could Harm the EU

Core Content

The 2014 European elections were seen as a critical opportunity to enhance the EU's democratic legitimacy. However, the proposal to select the next European Commission president through the European Parliament (EP) elections, with political parties nominating their own candidates, is criticized for potentially undermining the EU's institutional balance and effectiveness.

Main Arguments

• Democratic Legitimacy Concerns: The authors argue that making the Commission president a partisan choice could reduce the EU's legitimacy rather than increase it. The Commission is meant to be an impartial institution, and a partisan president would risk being seen as biased.

• Impact on Commission Functioning: A partisan president would lack the credibility to enforce rules against national governments of different political affiliations. The Commission's role as a "guardian of the treaties" and a referee in EU policy-making is at risk if it becomes a political actor.

• Institutional Conflicts: The new procedure could lead to increased tensions between the European Parliament and national governments, potentially resulting in political deadlock and undermining the EU's ability to function effectively.

• Limited Effectiveness of the Procedure: The process may not attract capable politicians, as national leaders are unlikely to risk their positions for a potentially uncertain EU role. Furthermore, the selection of a Commission president through EP elections does not align with the EU's current institutional structure, which requires consensus among member-states.

Key Information

The New Proposal

• The Lisbon Treaty allows the European Council to propose a candidate for Commission president, who is then elected by the EP.
• Political parties (EPP, PES, Liberals, Greens) are now putting forward their own candidates, with the EPP planning to pre-select a nominee through informal channels.
• The goal is to make the European elections more significant and to create a more direct link between voters and EU leadership.

Current Commission Role

• The Commission is responsible for enforcing fiscal discipline and managing EU-wide policies, such as those related to the eurozone and the Schengen area.
• It has gained new powers, but these require impartiality and technical competence to be effective.
• The Commission president is not the main decision-maker, but rather the leader of a collegial body.

Political Dynamics

• The EU's decision-making structure is based on a balance of power between the European Council, the Commission, and the Parliament.
• If the Commission president is elected by the EP, it may shift this balance, with the Parliament gaining more influence and the Commission becoming more subservient to party interests.

Risks of Politicization

• A partisan president may lead to accusations of bias, reducing the Commission's ability to act as an impartial referee.
• National governments may resist EU-level decisions if they perceive them as politically motivated.
• Voter turnout and engagement in EP elections remain low, and the procedure may not improve this by making the elections more "political."

Conclusion

The authors suggest that instead of focusing on selecting a Commission president through EP elections, politicians should use the campaign to promote a broader public debate on the benefits of European integration. They emphasize that the EU's legitimacy can only be strengthened if the political process is transparent, inclusive, and based on genuine public engagement, not just on partisan nominations.

Institutional Implications

• Scenario 1: If the Parliament wins, the Commission president will prioritize the Parliament over member-states, leading to a loss of balance and potential institutional conflict.
• Scenario 2: A protracted constitutional crisis could arise if the Parliament refuses to approve the Council's candidate, resulting in political stalemate and weakened EU institutions.
• Scenario 3: The EPP may pre-select a candidate, maintaining the traditional method of selection and avoiding open confrontation.

Final Thoughts

• The 2014 European elections are more significant than previous ones due to the ongoing euro crisis.
• The EU's survival as a political system depends on its ability to engage citizens and rebuild trust.
• National leaders have a responsibility to participate in the European campaign to justify their decisions and promote European integration.