This site is for archive purposes. Please visit www.eliamep.gr for latest updates
Go to Top

ECJ legal rulings designed to help the Eurozone are threatening the accountability of European governance

Beck, G. (2014) “ECJ legal rulings designed to help the Eurozone are threatening the accountability of European governance“, LSE EUROPP, 10 December.

 

One of the most controversial issues during the Eurozone crisis has been the extent to which policies aimed at resolving the crisis, such as the decision by the European Central Bank to adopt ‘Outright Monetary Transactions’ (OMT), comply with EU law. Gunnar Beck writes that the European Court of Justice has adopted outwardly ‘political’ rulings which allow for courses of action to take place which are incompatible with the EU’s treaty framework. He argues that this approach has undermined the accountability of European governance and has ensured EU law has become merely the continuation of politics by other means.

In his speech on EU immigration on 28 November, the British Prime Minister called for radical changes in the availability of UK state benefits to immigrants from elsewhere in the EU. Only a couple of weeks before, however, Chancellor Merkel, in an interview with the Sunday Times, made clear she would oppose David Cameron’s plans to renegotiate the EU’s free movement rules possibly by curbing the powers of the European Court of Justice. Because any amendment of the Court’s powers requires unanimity, this means that even if David Cameron were to succeed in placing further limits on so-called ‘benefits tourism’, the scope of any such limited safeguards would remain subject to the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice.

How justified is the UK Government’s apparent faith in the ability of the Court of Justice to be an impartial arbiter between national interests and ever greater integration? The Court’s approach to the Eurozone crisis suggests this perspective may be rather naïve.

 

Relevant posts: