|
No.11/03
Author:
Francesca Bignami
Title:
Three Generations of Participation
Rights in European Administrative Proceedings
Abstract:
This paper develops a conceptual
framework for analyzing the development of participation rights in Community
administration from the early 1970's to the present day. Procedural rights can
be divided into three categories, each of which is associated with a distinct
phase in Community history and a particular set of institutional actors. The
first set of rights, the right to a fair hearing when the Commission inflicts
sanctions or other forms of hardship on individuals, first emerged in the
1970's in the context of competition proceedings and later in areas such as
anti-dumping and structural funds. This phase was driven by the Court of
Justice and an English, and to a lesser extent, German conception of the value
of a fair hearing. The rise of transparency in the 1990's-- the requirement of
openness in all Community institutions, including administration--marks the
second stage. The drive for transparency was led by certain member countries
with longstanding traditions of open government--the Netherlands, Denmark, and
Sweden--as well as the European Parliament. The most recent phase in the
development of process rights is the debate on whether and under what
conditions, individuals, firms, and their associations, billed "civil society,"
should take part in Community legislative and rulemaking proceedings. The
Commission and now the Convention on the Future of Europe have been the keenest
proponents of giving citizens and their associations a right to participate in
rulemaking and legislative proceedings.
Civil
society participation is then critically examined. Representation--not
expertise or good management practices--is the only justification for
allocating power, within the Community policymaking process, to individual
citizens and their organizations. Yet there is no consensus in Europe, where
republican, corporatist, and liberal traditions continue to flourish, on the
legitimacy of representation outside of political parties and the electoral
process. Without wider consensus, I conclude that associational participation
in Community policymaking should not be entrenched and that the Commission
should, in mediating the informal influence of civil society actors, act in
awareness of its innate institutional bias toward liberal interest group
pluralism.
Download: PDF
* | RTF**
* The free viewer (Acrobat Reader)
for PDF file is available at the
Adobe
Systems.
** rtf is a (more or less) universally readable
format. Just download the file, which can be opened in most word
processors. |
|