(Re)appointment of Tusk
It is indeed striking that Tusk's appointment for another two and a half year as President of the European Council was NOT a unanimous decision in the European Council.
Furthermore, it is worth to note that the unanimity was not achieved by his OWN country, Poland, and by Poland alone. Which country subsequently out of anger refused to sign the conclusions of the European Council meeting. However what I want to bring to the surface here is the procedure leading to the (re)appointment of the President as such.
The appointment of the President of the European Council is indeed a sole matter for the European Council, which decides by qualified majority (art. 15 TEU). And yes, institutions such as parliaments may usually decide on their presiding officer. However, in the EU, with the exception of the Commission (where the European Parliament and the European Council have to agree on a candidate) and of the ECB, which president is appointed by the European Council as well. Note here that the European Parliament plays a crucial role in the appointment process of the Commission President, and is also consulted for the Presidency of the ECB (art. 284 TFEU). So is it not odd that for the appointment of the President of the European Council no one else but the European Council is involved, not even the European Parliament? The President after all, prepares, executes and chairs meetings; presents reports to the European Parliament after each meeting of the European Council, and ensures the external representation of the EU.
So it seems, the President of the European Council is not just a presiding officer, but also an important figure for the EU's legitimacy and responsiveness to the EU citizens, the accountability of the European Council and its representation abroad. It may be considered self evident that the European Council wants a firm say in its own president and does not want candidates with a (too) strong mandate from public opinion, which could conflict with the role and importance of its members and could lead to a candidate overpowering the European Council.
Having said that, the President plays an important role in the EU's architecture, but lacks himself a strong mandate. The European Council members are accountable to their own parliaments; the Commission is accountable to the European Parliament. But where is the President? Why not allow the EP a stronger role in his appointment? That is not foreseen in the Treaties, so a formal role is out of the question without a change of the Treaties. But why not seek a more elaborate consultation of the European Parliament and the EU citizens? That would constitutie a tiny next step in enhancing legitimacy and responsiveness of the EU and the European Council, as increasingly important institution.
This blog is published on Law Blogs Maastricht
-
A.W. HeringaMore articles from A.W. HeringaAuthor and editor of numerous books and articles on Dutch Constitutional law, the European Convention on Human Rights, the European Social Charter, comparative constitutional law, US constitutional law, Human Rights and legal education. Author of blogs on the Montesquieu Institute website.
Other blogs:
Also read
-
In the 1980s, in the heyday of Thatcherism, Scottish actor Ian Richardson starred in the leading role of Francis Urquhart in the BBC series House of Cards. In it, Urquhart, who starts out as the Chief Whip for the Conservative government led by Thatcher’s fictional successor, schemes against and...
-
(1798-1872). Dutch liberal statesman. Drafted the 1848 revision of the Dutch Constitution that established the parliamentary system.
-
Since the educational spaces in our faculty have all been named, we would like to tell about the background of the elected jurists and cases. Through a series of blogs we want to make the names come to life and show that our building houses a legal faculty. After all, not everyone knows all the ins...
