How is policy making in the judiciary

Justice and Home Affairs

The Political System of the European Union pp 1-23 | Cite as

Regulations and practice of the area of ​​freedom, security and justice
  • Wolfgang Wessels
Living reference work entry

Latest version View entry history

First Online:
Part of the Springer Reference Social Sciences book series (SRS)

Summary

When distributing competences between the national and European levels, the member states have transferred a core area of ​​state action to the Union with central areas of justice and home affairs policy. Although closely linked to steps towards economic integration, the so-called “Area of ​​Freedom, Security and Justice” (RFSR) is a new - albeit less clearly defined - integration goal of the EU, which the Lisbon Treaty now adds to the frequently dominant concepts of the Single market and economic and monetary union. In contrast to the CFSP, a model development pattern from an intergovernmental experimental phase to supranationalization through an increasing use of central elements of the community method can be observed in several development stages. In the concrete form, a difficult balance in the search for a balance between measures for internal security and the respect for fundamental rights can be observed again and again.

keywords

The area of ​​freedom, security and justice Communityization with exceptions Schengen integration spiral Frontex
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

literature

Introductory literature

  1. Geddes, Andrew. 2017. Police and judicial cooperation: Integrating security interests. In The Institutions of the European Union, Eds. Dermot Hodson and John Peterson, 4th ed., 283-307. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Lavenex, Sandra. 2015. Justice and home affairs: Institutional change and policy continuity. In Policy-making in the European Union, Eds. Helen Wallace, Mark A. Pollack, and Alasdair R. Young, 7th ed., 367-387. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Monar, Jörg, ed. 2010. The institutional framework of the AFSJ: Specific challenges and dynamics of change. In The institutional dimension of the European Union’s area of ​​freedom, security and justice, 21-52. Brussels: P.I.E. Peter Lang, Google Scholar
  4. Müller-Graff, Peter-Christian, and Friedeman Kainer. 2016. Area of ​​Freedom, Security and Justice. In Europe from A to Z. Paperback of European integration, Eds. Werner Weidenfeld and Wolfgang Wessels, 14th edition, 380–382. Baden-Baden: Nomos.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

literature

  1. Alexandrova, Petya, Marcello Carammia, Sebastiaan Princen, and Arco Timmermans. 2014. Measuring the European Council Agenda: Introducing a new approach and dataset. European Union Politics 15 (1): 152-167. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bopp, Franziska, Cyril Gläser, and Wolfgang Wessels. 2010. The security dimension of EU policies between legal provisions and living practice: The European Council as the key. In Europe’s 21st century challenge: Delivering liberty, Eds. Sergio Carrera, Didier Bigo, and R.B. J. Walker, 81-90. Farnham: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  3. Federal Constitutional Court. 2009. Judgment of June 30, 2009 - 2 BvE 2/08. Karlsruhe. http://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/SharedDocs/Entscheidungen/DE/2009/06/es20090630_2bve000208.html. Accessed on 01/01/2018.
  4. European Council. 1984. Brussels. Conclusions of the Presidency of the Fontainebleu European Council, 26 June 1984. http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/european-council/conclusions/pdf-1992-1975/fontainebleau-european-council,-25-and-26-june-1984/. Accessed on 01/01/2018.
  5. European Council. 1999. Tampere. Presidency conclusions. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/summits/tam_de.htm. Accessed on 01/01/2018.
  6. European Council. 2017. Brussels. 20Member States agree on the details of the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor's Office. http://www.consilium.europa.eu/de/press/press-releases/2017/06/08-eppo/. Accessed 01/01/2018.
  7. European Commission. 2017. Rome Declaration. 25 March 2017. Declaration by the leaders of 27 Member States and the European Council, the European Parliament and the European Commission. https://europa.eu/european-union/file/22711/download_de?token=OuPX3Oup. Accessed on 01/01/2018.
  8. Geddes, Andrew. 2017. Police and judicial cooperation: Integrating security interests. In the Institutions of the European Union, Eds. Dermot Hodson and John Peterson, 4th ed., 283-307. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Guild, Elspeth, Sergio Carrera, and Thierry Balzacq. 2008. The changing dynamics of security in an enlarged European Union. In The changing landscape of European liberty and security 2008 (12). http://aei.pitt.edu/11457/1/1746.pdf. Accessed 01/01/2018.
  10. Gusy, Christoph, and Sebastian Müller. 2009. Police and judicial cooperation. In European Integration Yearbook 2009, Eds. Werner Weidenfeld and Wolfgang Wessels, 181–188. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  11. Hill, Christopher. 1993. The capability expectation gap, or conceptualizing Europe’s international role. Journal of Common Market Studies 31 (3): 305–328. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Monar, Jörg. 2013. Eurojust and the European public prosecutor perspective: From cooperation to integration in EU criminal justice? Perspectives on European Politics and Society 14 (3): 339-356. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Monar, Jörg. 2014. EU internal security governance: The case of counter-terrorism. European Security 23 (2): 195-209. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Moravcsik, Andrew, and Frank Schimmelfennig. 2009. Liberal intergovernmentalism. In European integration theory, Eds. Thomas Diez and Antje Wiener, 67–87. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Müller-Graff, Peter-Christian, and Friedeman Kainer. 2016. Area of ​​Freedom, Security and Justice. In Europe from A to Z. Paperback of European integration, Eds. Werner Weidenfeld and Wolfgang Wessels, 14th edition, 380–382. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  16. Niemeier, Michael, and Marc André Wiegand. 2010. Europol and the architecture of internal security. In The institutional dimension of the European Union’s area of ​​freedom, security and justice, Ed. Jörg Monar, 169–194. Brussels: P.I.E. Peter Lang, Google Scholar
  17. Nilsson, Hans G., and Julian Siegl. 2010. The council in the area of ​​freedom, security and justice. In The institutional dimensions of the European Union’s area of ​​freedom, security and justice, Ed. Jörg Monar, 53–82. Brussels: P.I.E. Peter Lang, Google Scholar
  18. Piris, Jean-Claude. 2010. The Lisbon Treaty. A Legal and Political Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Pollack, Mark A. 2007. Rational choice and EU politics. In Handbook of European Union politics, Eds. Knud Erik Jørgensen, Mark A. Pollack and Ben Rosamond, 31–56. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  20. Council of the European Union. 2016. Brussels. Justice and Home Affairs Council, 08-09 December 2016. http://www.consilium.europa.eu/de/meetings/jha/2016/12/08-09/. Accessed on 01/01/2018.
  21. Schäfer, David, and Wolfgang Wessels. 2014. European Council. In European Integration Yearbook 2014, Eds. Werner Weidenfeld and Wolfgang Wessels, 87–98. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  22. Schäfer, David, and Wolfgang Wessels. 2015. European Council. In European Integration Yearbook 2015, Eds. Werner Weidenfeld and Wolfgang Wessels, 75–84. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  23. Schäfer, David, and Wolfgang Wessels. 2016. European Council. In European Integration Yearbook 2016, Eds. Werner Weidenfeld and Wolfgang Wessels, 81–92. Baden-Baden: Nomos.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Tekin, Funda. 2012. Differentiated integration at work. The institutionalization and implementation of opt-outs from European integration in the area of ​​freedom, security and justice. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  25. Trauner, Florian, and Ariadna Ripoll Servent. 2016. The communitarization of the area of ​​freedom, security and justice: Why institutional change does not translate into policy change. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies 54 (6): 1417-1432. Google Scholar
  26. Trentmann, Christian. 2017. Eurojust and the European Public Prosecutor's Office - On the right track? Journal for the entire field of criminal law 129 (1). www.degruyter.com/view/j/zstw.2017.129.issue-1/zstw-2017-0005/zstw-2017-0005.xml. Accessed 01/01/2018.
  27. Wessels, Wolfgang. 2015. Dynamics of the integration process: The European Council as driver of the 'Integration Spiral' in the EU’s constitutional evolution. In Private law, commercial law, constitutional law. Festschrift for Peter-Christian Müller-Graff on his 70th birthday on September 29, 2015, Eds. Cordula Stumpf, Friedemann Kainer and Christian Baldus, 1305–1313. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  28. Wessels, Wolfgang. 2016. The European Council. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Political Science and European AffairsUniversity of CologneKölnGermany