Political acountability Flashcards
(10 cards)
accountabilty and legitimacy
-the government must be carried out in a way that is legitimate and accountable
(concepts of these are contraversial)
-academic debates surrounding legitimacy and accountability in the current political structure are guided by 3 approaches- (tend to be general theories that do not examine the historical context)
1. utalitarianism
2. contractualism
3. contestation
utalitarianism
-popular in the 19th century
-utalitarians try to ensures that institutions are developed in such a way that satisfys most of preferences of the people being governed
-utalitarians sometimes struggle to link institutions to the best policy outcomes
-Mills anf Bentham- attempted to resolve this problem through devising framework of accountability as a means of ensuring that officials were called to account to public opinion (represents what most people want out of a policy)
-they focused on creating systems and mechanisms that would hold officials responsible for their actions and ensure they were answerable to the desires of the public.
contractualism
-seeks to put in place political structures that protect each individuals ability to shape their lives in accordance with ther own preferences consistent with a respect for a similar ability for others (come together to agree on a set of rules)
-Scanlon (present idea to ethics in general)- an action is permitted if it is one that peoples wouldnt reasonably reject
-from this persepctive- the institutional design of key political processes needs to be done in such a way as to promote decision-making mad in accordance with this principle
-better approach than utalitarianism at framing constitutional rules that can be deduced more straightforwardly from the principle of impartiality (the idea that you shouldnt take political decisions that impact too harshly on other people unless you can justify with a strong public policy reasons)
-therefore, this approach inspires a number of key doctrines concerned with the accountability of EU institutions (such as fundamental rights and proportionality)
contestation
-more recent (after the development of the other 2)
-ultalitariams-criticized as makes decisions to please everyone but this masks the complex political decisions they have to make and cant always give everyone what they want
-contestation- always going to be political decisions of which interests to sacrifise and which to promote so cant always simplify it to make straightfoward and legitimate decisions
-contractualists- criticized for assuming that a coherent set of values related to political legitimacy can be identified as forming the core of an impartiality constructed consesus (always going to be someone who rejects)
-contestation- emphazised that central to any political activity is a range od different value and interests, so create legitimacy by creating institutions and policies which are open to debate and contestation (not dominated by one interest)
-ofucses on accountability in which legitimacy is secured through creating systems that hols political agencies accountable to the people their decision impacts
accountability and legitimacy
-commentatorys and policy makers turned to attempting to frame the powers exercised by the EU less from the conception of legitimacy and more narrowly on accountability
-shift can be traced back to the crisis of the Maastricht treaty
-most striking symbol of the crisis in the legitimacy of the EU was the failure of the constitutional treaty (questioned whether current approaches to EU legitimacy were valid)
-Masstricht crisis might be seen as a failure of the utalitarian and technocratic approach
-constituional treaty might be seen as a failure of the contractarian approach
-by 2000s was a shift away from seeking legitimacy and instead a greater emphasis on accountability- Liz Fisher supports
-shift to accountability- EU no longer assessed on governmental (legitimacy in regards to main political institutions) structure but instead a governance structure (all the parties making political decisions)
-emphasized not only the internal structures of the EU but the way in which the EU interacted with the member states
-certain national courts, like the german constitutional court, had developed a more questioning and sceptical approach to accepting the claims of EU law
-the constitutional vision developement is termed -constitutional pluralism- not just 1 EU constitution working but many constitutional perceptives on the EU (no no way of finding a balance)
political accountability mechanisms in the EU
(an alternative to judicial accountability)
- wider than the judicial accountability mechanisms of article 263 (JR) and article 340(2) State liability
-political accountability (can raise lots of different question about a policy) more flexible than judicial (only narrow regarding legality)- need to be assessed not only in the light of a shifft towards the new standard of legitimacy - whether JR is incompatible with our understanding of democracy and whether political should be more significant
2 forms of political accountability
- European Parliament
-ensures the accountability of EU institutions and in particular the commission has been strrengethened
-has powers relating to the appointment of members of the commission under article 17(7) TEU (must approve the appointment of the commission president anf then the body of the commisioners)
- also powers relating to the dissmissal of commissioners by QMV article 234 TFEU
-article 193 EC established the right of the EP to estbalish a temporary committee of inquiry to investigate alleged contraventions or maladminstration in the implementation of EU law (now contained in article 256 TFEU
- the European Ombudsman
created by treaty of maastricht
-powers set out in article 288
-elected by the parlaiment
-task to investigate complaints of maladminstration, then left to the EO to develop a definition of maladminstration
-wider standards than JR
discussion
“in the EU, the concept of ‘new governance’ has come to denote a whole range of strategies that depart from traditional rule bound and democratic apporaches to governing such as flexibility, deliberation, participation by the wide range of groups, an multi-level power sharing. The legitimacy of such systems can be fostered in a number of ways (including the promotion of accountability)”
- tp ensure legitimacy of the political mechanisms must promote accountability (EU parlimanet and ombudsman”
“accountablity contributed to that stability by not only making decision-making more democractic and controling power but also promoting trust”
accountability contributes to the stability of EU lawby “ not only making decision-making more democractic and controling power but also promoting trust”- Elizabeth FIsher
how political mechanisms ensure legitmacy?
European Parliament-
- the members of the EP are directly elected and are representative of the citizens of the union states
article 14(2)- “The European Parliament shall be composed of representatives of the union citizens”
-the roles and powers of such members consists of legislative, supervisory, and budgetary
-as a result there are a number of advantages to having the citizens of the unions elect those to use such powers
1.as suggested by the official website of the European Union- similalry as when voting in their own countries, voting for the members of the European Parliament allows the citizens of the EU to “make their boices heard” and have their say in the running and implementation of EU law
2.can also build trust and confidence in the EU legal system and conselquenlty can increase the acceptance of citizens of the law enacted by their representative bodies - as suggested by scholar Pascua Mateo “this is more than sufficient basis for recognising it…as having an indubitable democratic legitimacy”
