Analysis of the EU Measures Adopted in Response to Migrant Crisis: Principle of Institutional Balance and Typology of Legal Acts in the EU Revisited

Janja Simentić

Abstract

This article analyses measures that European Union adopted in response to migrant crisis, with a special emphasis on Decision 2015/1601 establishing provisional measures in the area of international protection for the benefit of Italy and Greece. As Slovakia and Hungary filed actions for annulment of this Decision before Court of Justice of the European Union, their claims are taken as a starting point for the analysis. Therefore, this Decision is analyzed in the framework of the principle of institutional balance and the typology of legal acts in the EU. After the presentation of principle of institutional balance, research is focused on relation between the Council and European Council and European Parliament in the process of adoption of this Decision. It is concluded that the sole possible encroach upon the principle of institutional balance can be found in the Council’s neglection to reconsult the EP after the change in the initial content of the Decision (deletion of Hungary). As for the typology of acts in the EU, having in mind the process of evolution of the division between legislative and non-legislative acts, it is concluded that the main criteria for the differentiation between these two acts is the procedure in which the act is adopted and not its content, as Slovakia and Hungary claim.

References

Books and Articles

1. Allerkamp D.K, (2010) “Who Sets the Agenda? How the European Council and the Team Presidencies Are Undermining the Commission’s Prerogative”, European Consortium for Political Research, Standing Group on the European Union.
2. Bast J. (2012) “New categories of acts after the Lisbon reform: dynamics of parliamentarization in EU Law”, in: Common Market Law Review, 49, No. 3: pp. 885–928.
3. Ramirez P. (2013) “Commentary on Article 10“, in: Blanke H-J., Stelio M. (eds.) “The Treaty on European Union (TEU), A Commentary“. Springer.
4. Chevallier-Govers C. (2013) „Commentary on Article 13 TEU“, in: Blanke H-J., Stelio M. (eds.) “The Treaty on European Union (TEU), A Commentary“. Springer.
5. Bocquillon P, Dobbels M. (2013) “An elephant on the 13th floor of the Berlaymont? European Council and Commission relations in legislative agenda setting”, in: Journal of European Public Policy 21, No. 1: pp. 20-38.
6. Chalmers D., Davies G., Monti G. (2014) “European Union Law”, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
7. Chamon M. (2015) “The Institutional Balance, an ill-fated principle of EU law?”, European Public Law 21, no 2: pp. 371-391.
8. Curtin D., Manucharyan T. (2015) “Legal Acts and Hierarchy of Norms in EU Law”, in: Arnull A., Chalmers D. (eds.), “The Oxford Handbook of European Union Law”, Oxford University Press.
9. Den Heijer M., Rijpma J., Spijkerboer T. (2016) “Coercion, prohibition, and great expectations: the continuing failure of the Common European Asylum System” in: Common Market Law Review, 53. No. 3: pp. 607-642.
10. Dougan M. (2008) “The Treaty of Lisbon 2007: winning minds, not hearts” in: Common Market Law Review 45, No. 3: pp. 617-703.
11. Editorial Comments (2015) „From eurocrisis to asylum and migration crisis: Some legal and institutional considerations about the EU’s current struggles” in: Common Market Law Review, 52, No. 6: pp. 1437–1450.
12. Gilbert G. (2015) “Why Europe Does Not Have a Refugee Crisis” in: International Journal of Refugee Law, Vol. 27, No. 4: pp. 531–535.
13. Hofmann H. C. H. (2003) “A Critical Analysis of the new Typology of Acts in the Draft Treaty Establishing a Constitution for Europe“, European Integration online Papers (EIoP) 7, No. 9.
14. Jacqué J-P. (2004) “The Principle of Institutional Balance” in: Common Market Law Review 41, No. 2: pp. 383-391.
15. Lenaerts K., Van Nuffel P. (2011) “European Union Law”, Sweet and Maxwell, London.
16. Bering Liisberg J. (2006) “The EU Constitutional Treaty and its distinction between legislative and non-legislative acts – Oranges into apples?”, Jean Monnet Working Paper 01/06, New York University School of Law.
17. Smulders B., Eisele K. (2012) “Reflections on the Institutional Balance, the Community Method and the Interplay between Jurisdictions after Lisbon”, College of Europe Research Paper in Law 04/2012.

Documents

1. COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION of 8.6.2015 on a European resettlement scheme, C (2015) 3560 final
2. COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN COUNCIL AND THE COUNCIL, First report on relocation and resettlement, COM (2016) 165 final
3. COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS A EUROPEAN AGENDA ON MIGRATION, COM (2015) 240 final
4. European Parliament legislative resolution of 17 September 2015 on the proposal for a Council decision establishing provisional measures in the area of international protection for the benefit of Italy, Greece and Hungary (COM (2015) 0451 – C8-0271/2015 – 2015/0209(NLE))
5. Final report of Working Group IX on Simplification, CONV 424/02
6. Mandate for the 2007 Intergovernmental Conference, Presidency Conclusions – Brussels, 21/22 June 2007, 11177/1/07 REV 1, ANNEX I
7. Proposal for a COUNCIL DECISION establishing provisional measures in the area of international protection for the benefit of Italy and Greece, COM (2015) 286 final
8. Proposal for a COUNCIL DECISION establishing provisional measures in the area of international protection for the benefit of Italy, Greece and Hungary, COM (2015) 451 final
9. Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person (recast), COM (2016) 270 final
10. Statement of the European Council of 23^rd April 2015
11. European Parliament Press Release, Plenary sessions, Immigration [17-09-2015 – 11:04]

Treaties

1. Treaty on European Union (TEU)
2. Treaty on the functioning of the European Union (TFEU)

 

Case law of the CJEU

1. Case 138/79 Roquette Frères v Council [1980] ECR 3360, ECLI:EU:C:1980:249
2. Case 70/88, Parliament v. Council, [1990] ECR I-2041
3. Case 21/94 European Parliament v Council [1995] ECR Ι-1853, ECLI:EU:C:1995:220
4. Case T-18/10, Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami and Others v European Parliament and Council of the European Union, ECLI:EU:T:2011:419
5. Case C‑583/11 P Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami and Others v European Parliament and Council of the European Union, ECLI:EU:C:2013:21
6. Case C-643/15
7. Case C-647/15

Internet sources

1. Council of the European Union, Voting system: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/council-eu/voting-system/unanimity/ [Accessed 17 June 2016].
2. Peers S. (2015) Relocation of Asylum-Seekers in the EU: Law and Policy. Available at: http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.rs/2015/09/relocation-of-asylum-seekers-in-eu-law.html [Accessed 17 June 2016].
3. Vikarska Z. (2015) The Slovak Challenge to the Asylum-Seekers’ Relocation Decision: A Balancing Act. Available at: http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.rs/2015/12/the-slovak-challenge-to-asylum-seekers.html. [Accessed 17 June 2016].