The Law of Administrative Organisation of the EU - A Comparative Study
Final Report Abstract
The growing differentiation of the administration of the European Union is one of the most pertinent developments in the European integration process. The ongoing ‘agencification’ is most visible, but there are other important features such as the structural change of the Commission, the establish- ment of an administrative framework for the Council, the transferral of administrative tasks to the European Central Bank or the establishment of new administrative ‘satellites’ beyond these phenom- ena. The analysis of this development is far advanced in terms of description and scrutiny of single matters such as judicial review, liability and legitimacy. There is, however, no comprehensive conceptualisation. This study aims at filling that lacuna in developing a Law of Administrative Organisation for the European Union following a comparative study of the U.S. administration. In many Member States’ administrative jurisdictions a Law of Administrative Organisation can be discerned which provides a conceptual toolbox that served European Administrative Law in different ways. Nonetheless, the relevant European law cannot be considered as a synthesis of those jurisdictions. New insights can be drawn from a comparison with the legal structure of the U.S. ad- ministration, given that it represents an administration comparable in size and with prima facie struc- tural parallels. This study does not perform a schematic transfer of institutions and models from one legal system to the other, but strives for the advancement of European law mirrored in an analysis of the U.S. Law of Administrative Organisation. This aim is reached in three steps: First, the conceptual, i.e. terminological basis is established. What is an institution, a department or an agency under European law? Where is the power to establish any of them derived from? The Treaties are not conclusive on these questions, which creates a wide range of conceptualisation by doctrinal and comparative work. It is helpful to see how the U.S. successfully deal with a considerable measure of plurality within their administrative framework. Second, how can the European administration be legitimate? What elements of oversight and control are needed to reach a level of legitimacy that is immune towards unjustified contestation with respect to the standards of the Treaties and to general legitimacy standards? It is again worthwhile considering how the U.S. system of administrative organisation achieves legitimacy in a pluralist system. Third, what is the effect of federalism in administrative organisation? The contrast with the specific shape of U.S. (administrative) federalism is most revealing.
