EU decision-making has always been criticised, mostly due to its complexity. Nowadays, especially with regard to several crises Europe is facing, the criticism is overwhelming. However, such criticism is rarely accompanied by an even superficial attempt to explore EU decision-making and its specificity, which can briefly be described as multi-level, multi-faceted, and complex. The purpose of this article is to present and analyse decision-making in the European Union through the prism of three logics of political action often used in international relations, the logic of consequentiality, the logic of appropriateness and the logic of justification. These examine the motives, behaviour and goals of players who influence decisions. The main thesis of this article is that the specifics of the EU decision-making mean that each of the logics is reflected even in terms of single issues. This results in the fact that the European Union, in terms of its decision-making, remains a sui generis structure, with a mode of decision-making incomparable to other international structures. Analysis of EU decision-making through the prism of the three logics also gives a research perspective to help understanding of specific EU decisions in different integration and international contexts.
Sovereignty in the European Union is restricted by EU law and policies. The weakest and peripheral states have the least impact on the shape of this law and policies and hence are most constrained thereby. In the case of the largest states sovereignty is reinforced. Countries with the greatest influence on the way the Union functions are able to use its instruments to implement goals that result from their national democratic processes, which means that the sovereignty of the most powerful states is enhanced at the expense of those on the periphery. The key to explain this phenomenon is the asymmetry of power in the EU among the Member States. In a way, the smaller states, which are weaker economically and politically, trade their national sovereignty for economic benefits or for a stronger sense of stability and security. At the same time, the crises that affect Europe show that the said benefits from limiting sovereignty are not durable, as they have resulted in a number of economic, social and political problems, undermining both stability and a sense of security.
The financial crisis has resulted in EU Member States having to pay massive amounts of money to rescue their banks. To protect taxpayers’ money in the future, the EU institutions have made some profound amendments to the legal framework, shifting the financial burden stemming from banks’ failures to some stakeholders, mainly on banks’ shareholders and unsecured creditors. This is a part of the banking union, the supervision on banks by one body is supplemented by the Single Resolution Fund. However, the details of such a system are disappointing because they do not guarantee that taxpayers’ money really will be protected in future crises, as envisaged.
This paper deals with the regulation which specifies the rules in which the Sejm affects the policies of the European Union. It examines the assumptions for change in respect of the Act of 8 October 2010 on Cooperation of the Council of Ministers with the Sejm and the Senate in Matters Related to the Republic of Poland’s Membership in the European Union, as well as the Standing Orders of the Sejm. The proposed changes relate primarily to the socalled a general mechanism of cooperation in the field of EU law making between the Council of Ministers and the Sejm and the Senate. It is assumed that general principles relating to the so-called political dialogue and the carrying out by the Sejm of notification duties will be introduced by the Cooperation Act. The proposed amendment to the Standing Orders of the Sejm deals with participation by the branch committees in consideration of documents that are sent to the Sejm by the EU institutions, as well as the participation of the Sejm operating at plenary sitting in activities related to Poland’s membership in the EU.
The document aims at establishing a mechanism enabling the Union to respond when a third country, by measures affecting trade or investment, interferes with the legitimate choices of the Union or of its Member States to adopt or refrain from adopting a particular act. Given the exclusive nature of the EU’s competences in the area of the Common Commercial Policy, as well as the EU’s economic potential and the resulting potentially greater effectiveness of response measures at the EU level, the proposal deserves to be supported by the representative of the Republic of Poland on the EU forum.
The paper presents information on the legal regulation of the profession of a psychologist in Austria, Belgium, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Portugal, and Norway. In the European Union law that profession is covered by the so-called general system of recognition of professional qualifications. The article examines legal provisions regulating the profession, the qualification and educational requirements, and the conditions for practising psychology in the above-mentioned countries.
The purpose of this paper is to provide an opinion on the regulation of freedom of conscience in the constitutions of European Union countries (with the exception of Italian and Polish regulations). The author concludes that freedom of conscience is guaranteed in all European Union countries. In most of them, it is expressed explicitly in the Constitution, and in other countries, it is guaranteed under Article 9 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 4 November 1950.
The term “LIMITÉ” is used to mark sensitive unclassified documents which should be particularly secured because their public disclosure in an inappropriate moment might have had a negative impact on the decision-making process of the Council. Such documents are shared with the Member States and must be delivered only to appointed persons. Documents marked “LIMITÉ” must not be disclosed to public, media and individuals, unless an appropriate authorization has been given. The discussed documents are subject to the Council’s guidelines on the handling of documents internal to the Council. The guidelines are classified as ‘atypical’ acts (soft law documents). They are used primarily in internal organisation mechanisms of the EU.
The article provides a provisional systematization of EU policy on mass media. The approach of the European Communities to the issue of mass media in the last decades can be divided into several stages. In the initial period, relatively the longest one, EC organs were denied competences to interfere in this area. The 1980s and 1990s were characterized by an attempt on the part of the EU to work out adequate and distinct strategies regarding mass media. The moment the EC organs “gained” the competences to regulate the principles underlying the functioning of the media, a boisterous development of the EU medial law started and became especially conspicuous with the emergence of global media. Regulations on mass media initially pertained to television but then expanded onto audiovisual media services followed by a growing significance of the so-called “new media”. EU policy deals with the media in three different contexts: firstly, in the aspect of competition policy and principles governing the functioning of the internal market; secondly as an element of democratic and cultural infrastructure; and thirdly, on the plane of building the so-called information society. A hypothesis is put forward that the EU audiovisual policy is dominated by a two tracks strategy of regulating the functioning of the media.
The European Commission Communication on the Conference on the Future of Europe is a contribution to the inter-institutional discussion on the convening and operation of the Conference and its results. From this perspective, it is a working document, not a final one, which would cause the necessity to take a clear and comprehensive position. In the author’s opinion, the draft inter-institutional declaration on the Conference will be of key importance.
The article presents an analysis of rail freight and passenger transport in the EU and coordination of European transport corridors. The analysis was based on an assessment of the passengers’ traffic, density of railway lines in the EU countries, the dynamics of freight and passenger transport dynamics.
The purpose of the EU document is to discuss the existing rules on decision-making by the EU institutions in the taxation area, indicate the limits of unanimity in the area of EU and Member States’ tax policies and present an action plan for moving to qualified majority voting, as well as to enhance the role of the European Parliament in this area. From Poland’s point of view the proposed change in the rules for decision-making in tax matters may raise serious doubts as to the link between tax policy and EU political priorities, in particular climate and energy policy. On the basis of the information received, the government takes a negative assessment of the Commission’s proposal to move to qualified majority voting in the area of taxation policy and does not support the endorsement of the Communication’s action plan in this area.
The opinion presents the most important assumptions of the Draft General Budget of the EU for the fiscal year 2019. The document contains description of priorities adopted during drafting, planned revenues, expenditures, and changes over time (compared to the previous budget) in the projected amounts. The Polish government’s position on the 2019 Draft General Budget is positively assessed, including the government’s statement that during the work on the budget it will be striving for provision of the financial resources necessary to repay the liabilities contracte earlier by the Member States on behalf of the EU budget (it is particularly related to cohesion policy and development of rural areas – both being very important investment instruments in the EU).
Common Security and Defense Policy of the European Union (EU CSDP) has been the subject of numerous and diverse publications. However, they are largely descriptive rather than analytic, focusing on e.g. highlighting the origin of the above mentioned issue, its main stages, institutions or legal grounds. Too little attention is paid to, among others, such matters as: an attempt to systematize the constitutive elements of CSDP, depiction of the causes of problems occurring in this sector of integration, their classification or the presentation of consequences of such a state of things. These issues are considered in the present essay.
Presidency in the Council of the European Union creates conditions to shape the image of a state. This regularity is confirmed in the case of Poland as well. Especially if one takes into account the fact that Poland is the first large state of the ‘new EU’, which faced the task to preside the works of the EU Council. The main aim of the article is to discuss the preparatory stage to the process of shaping our state image during Polish presidency in the EU Council. It is therefore justified to illustrate activities which constitute these preparation as well as to discuss the activities undertaken by proper institutions. Especially if one considers their dual orientation. First of all, the absence of proper experience of Poland in the organization of the process of shaping its own image. Secondly, there exist the formal-legal proposals deciding on the character of the Presidency accepted on the basis of the Treaty of Lisbon.
The article refers to Polish membership in the European Union and the liberal perspective of its analysis. The paper discusses the shortages of the liberal approach. The article accepts the liberal thesis regarding the opportunities that the accession to the EU opens up for Polish development. It notes the significance of the European mechanisms of regional cooperation. Nevertheless, the paper emphasises that the liberal perspective ignores the inequalities of power in the European Union and misses some serious tendencies, both at the level of the community and in the domestic politics, that impede the state’s development. Thus, the article refers to the limited competitiveness of the Polish economy and the state’s difficulties with the identification of its interests in the dynamic and variable international environment. It warns against the marginalization of Poland as “semi-peripheral” member of the European Union. The main conclusion of the paper is that the case of Polish membership in the EU is too complicated to close it in the liberal frameworks. The liberal perspective needs a realist correction. It is extremely important in the context of the challenges that Poland faces together with the crisis of the European integration.
The object of the article is to present and assess the stance of the European Union towards unrecognized states. The implementation of the idea of supporting peace and democracy, freedom, equality and respect of human rights, minority rights included – all of them being values in which the European Union’s functioning is grounded – is especially problematic in relation to new state organisms. The EU is unable to take a uniform stance towards them that would allow to reconcile the right to independence with the necessity to guaranty the sovereign rights of the precedent states. In the cases discussed in the article the EU’s stance towards newly created states is conditioned by several factors. The first of them is the desire to play a key role on the international arena that manifests in conducting activities aimed at warranting peace and security in regions troubled by conflicts. Another is a concurrent tendency to respect the basic principles accepted by the international community after World War II, i.e. the sovereign equality of states and the right of nations to self-determination. The external actions of the European Union are also shaped by the stance of other international key actors. The above mentioned factors determine the EU’s stance towards unrecognized states, which is known as engagement without recognition.
The author presents initiatives launched by the European Union in order to overcome the financial crisis of the eurozone member states. To meet this goal emergency instruments were created (aid programs for Greece, European Stability Mechanism and purchase by the European Central Bank of loans issued by countries of the eurozone in debt crisis) as well as permanent instruments (the Euro Plus Pact, sharpened regulations of the Stability and Growth Pact and the Fiscal Pact). Emergency measures did not bring about any substantial positive effects since only the financial situation of Ireland improved to some extent. The state of public finances in Greece is still critical and therefore many economists suggest that this country should declare its bankruptcy. Permanent instruments to fight debt might yield the desired effects (in the case of a majority of the eurozone countries) if they are used consistently and in accordance with their object.
The application of European company law by domestic courts entails prior interpretation of EU legislation. Firstly, the manner of interpretation of European company law is affected by both the specific nature of European company law and l’acquis communautaire. Secondly, interpretation methods are subject to the principle of uniform interpretation, which aims to safeguard uniform understanding and application of l’acquis EUwide. Thirdly, when undertaking pro-European interpretation one must (i) have regard to all domestic methods of interpretation, (ii) in line with the blanket ban on contra legem interpretation, and (iii) bear in mind the purpose and wording of a directive serving as a point of reference for pro-European interpretation, as far as possible.
The aim of this article is presentation the problem of protection of multiculturalism in the European Union after its enlargement. There are two aspects of the issue: protection of cultural diversity within one community and within the space of the EU. The first part refers to the Polish and foreign regulations connected with the problem of protection of cultural pluralism. Special attention is paid to the rules of the Polish Constitution from 2nd April 1997 concerning to the liberty of conscience and religion. In addition, Austrian, German and French constitutional solutions referring to the liberty of religion are shortly presented. The second part of this article is presentation the EU programmes Culture 2000, MEDIA Plus and eContent. Analysis of these programmes shows that they promote the cultural diversity in Europe, which results from the cultural policy of the UE. In this context, it must be emphasized that article 151 part 4 of the consolidate version of the Treaty establishing the European Community states that the Community shall respect the diversity of its cultures. The EU programmes give the great opportunity to participate in the formation of the cultural policy of the EuropeanUnion. It is particularly important for Poland which should actively participate in these programmes. In conclusion, the author ascertains that the liberty of settling down in the EU inserts new norms and values into national cultures. Therefore, national minorities must have lawfully guaranteed the right to preserve their own religion, mother tongue and tradition. It must be stressed that this right is very well protected by Polish constitutional regulations. At the same time, the cultural policy of the European Union intends to encourage development of national cultures and promotion of inter-cultural dialogue. Consequently, one cannot agree with the statement that the process of integration of Europe will annihilate the cultural diversity in Europe. In particular, the entry of Poland to the European Union will not destroy Polish cultural identity. The EU s money will afford possibilities for quicker than ever development of Polish culture.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.