Cited page

Citations are available only to our active members. Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

X X

Cited page

Display options
Reset

The Integration of the European Community and Third States in Europe: A Legal Analysis

By: Andrew H. Evans | Book details

Contents
Look up
Saved work (0)

matching results for page

Page 269
Why can't I print more than one page at a time?
While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.

6
Joint Decision-Making

6.1 INTRODUCTION

Joint decision-making denotes the process whereby legally binding decisions under an international agreement are adopted by bodies representing the parties to that agreement. Arrangements for such decision-making are made in the EC Treaty and in agreements between the Community and third states. The implicit assumption in these arrangements is that integration simply entails obligations between these parties, which can satisfactorily be determined and developed by such bodies. In other words, it is implicitly assumed that issues of trade relations between the parties can be separated from issues of trade relations within each party.1 Such separation may be consistent with ideas of Community autonomy and national sovereignty, but may not adequately reflect the economic integration taking place between the parties. The resultant risk is that there may be a legal vacuum, inconsistent with real relations between the parties.

Under the EC Treaty the Council of the Union, composed of representatives of the governments of Member States, engages in joint decision-making. In its decision-making this institution is intended to secure reconciliation of positions formulated by each Member State independently of the other.2 Such reconciliation may be problematic, because independent formulation of its position by each Member State may tend to exaggerate differences between these positions.3 However, this tendency in the work of the Council may not only be affected by the operation of the trade liberalization and other requirements in the Treaty but is also intended to be countered by the supranation

____________________
1
Cf. the view that the legality of a 'delegation' of Community powers to such a body may depend on whether the powers relate to 'internal' or 'external' Community policies in K. Lenaerts, "Regulating the Regulatory Process: Delegation of Powers in the European Community" ( 1993) ELRev.23-49, at 26.
2
It is said that institutionalized dialogue permits individual issues to be examined in their broader context and provides mechanisms for earlier consultations on potential subjects of conflict. See H. G. Krenzler, "The Dialogue between the European Community and the United States of America: Present Form and Future Prospects" in J. Schwarze (ed.), The External Relations of the European Community, in Particular EC-US Relations ( Baden-Baden, 1989), 91-103, at 102. However, joint decision-making may not necessarily foster such a dialogue.
3
A consequence of the institutional structure established by the EC Treaty is said to be that different, conflicting, and often contradictory interests may be expressed as 'unified' national interests. See F. Snyder, "Ideologies of Competition in European Community Law" ( 1989) 52 MLR149-78, at 172.

-269-

Select text to:

Select text to:

  • Highlight
  • Cite a passage
  • Look up a word
Learn more Close
Loading One moment ...
of 413
Highlight
Select color
Change color
Delete highlight
Cite this passage
Cite this highlight
View citation

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?