ULUSÜSTÜ AVRUPA BİRLİĞİ KURUMLARI ARASINDAKİ GÜÇ DENGESİ: İŞBİRLİĞİ Mİ, REKABET Mİ?

Sıklıkla dünya üzerindeki en ileri bölgesel bütünleşme deneyimi olarak anılan Avrupa Birliği'nin (AB) temelinde üye devletlerden devredilen yetkiler yer almaktadır. AB düzeyinde bu yetkiler çoğunlukla hükümetlerarası ve ulusüstü özellikteki AB kurumları eliyle kullanılmaktadır. Üye devletler bütünleşmenin değişen ihtiyaçlarını göz önünde bulundurarak zaman içinde AB kurumlarına daha fazla yetki devrinde bulunmuştur. Bu durum AB kurumlarıyla üye devletler arasındaki ilişkilerin yeniden tanımlanmasını beraberinde getirdiği gibi kurumlar arası güç dağılımını da etkileyerek kurumlar arası ilişkilerin yeniden tanımlanmasına neden olmaktadır. Çalışma kapsamında ulusüstü AB kurumları olan Avrupa Komisyonu, Avrupa Parlamentosu ve Avrupa Birliği Adalet Divanı (ABAD) arasındaki güç dengesi konusu ele alınmıştır. Çalışmada aynı zamanda ulusüstü AB kurumları arasındaki ilişkilerin işbirlikçi mi rekabetçi mi olduğuna da değinilmiştir. Ele alınan ulusüstü AB kurumları arasındaki ilişki ikili kombinasyonlar halinde değerlendirilmiştir

THE BALANCE OF POWER AMONG THE SUPRANATIONAL EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS: COOPERATION OR COMPETITION?

The powers transferred by the member states lie at the root of the European Union (EU), which has been frequently labelled as the most advanced form of integration in the world. The powers transferred have been mostly used by the intergovernmental and supranational institutions at the EU level. By considering the changing needs of the integration, the EU institutions were empowered by the member states. This has affected the power distribution between the EU institutions and member states by leading the dominance of a new rationale in their relations, as well as the power balance between the EU institutions has shifted as a result. This study elaborates on the power balance among the three supranational EU institutions, namely European Commission, European Parliament and the European Court of Justice (ECJ). The study also provided an analysis about the nature of the relations between these supranational institutions, especially by defining these relations either as cooperative or competitive. The relations between the mentioned EU institutions are dealt with in the form of two-fold combinations in the study

PDF

___

Avrupa Parlamentosu, Avrupa Parlamentosu ve Komisyon arasındaki Çerçeve Anlaşma, http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&reference=P7-TA-2010- 0009&language=EN, (09.02.2010).
BLAUBERGER, Michael ve R. Daniel Kelemen (2017), “Can Courts Rescue National Democracy? Judicial Safeguards against Democratic Backsliding in the EU”, Journal of European Public Policy, 24 (3), ss. 321-336.
BURLEY, Anne-Marie ve Walter MATTLI (1993), “Europe Before the Court: A Political Theory of Legal Integration”, International Organization, 47(1), ss. 41-76.
CAMPBELL, Fiona Jayne (2013), “Power Sharing in the European Union: Has Court of Justice Activism Changed the Balance”, North East Law Review, 1, ss. 109-139.
CORBETT, Richard (1998), The European Parliament’s Role in Closer EU Integration, London: Palgrave Macmillan.
CORBETT, Richard, Francis Jacobs ve Michael Shackleton (2003), The European Parliament, London: John Harper Publishing, 5.Baskı.
DİNAN, Desmond (2005), Ever Closer Union, Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 3. Baskı.
EGEBERG, Morten, Åse GORNİTZKA ve Jarle TRONDAL (2014), “A Not So Technocratic Executive? Everyday Interaction between the European Parliament and the Commission”, West European Politics, 37(1), ss. 1-18.
GOSTYŃSKA, Agata (2014), “The European Parliament and European Commission After the May Elections: An Indispensible Partnership”, The Polish Quarterly of International Affairs, 1, ss. 83-95.
HEFEGER, Carsten ve Michael NEUGART (2013), “Policy Deviations, Uncertainty, and the European Court of Justice”, CESinfo Working Paper, 4143.
JUDGE, David ve David EARNSHAW (2002), “Political Responsibility for the Administration of Europe: The Commission’s Resignation March 1999”, Governance, 15(3), ss. 345-374.
KELEMEN, R. Daniel (2016), “The Court of Justice of the European Union in the Twenty-First Century”, Law and Contemporary Problems, 79(1), ss. 117-140.
KENNEDY, Tom (1998), Learning European Law, London: Sweet & Maxwell.
KREPPEL, Amie (2002), The European Parliament and Supranational Party System: A Study in Institutional Development, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
LODGE Juliet (1982), “The European Parliament: In Search for Institutional Change”, The World Today, 38(9), ss. 361-368.
MADURO, Miguel P. (1998), We The Court: The European Court of Justice and The European Economic Constitution, Oxford: Hart Publishing.
MAGNETTE, Paul (2005), What’s the EU? Nature & Prospects, London: Palgrave Macmillan.
MARKS, Gary, Liesbet HOOGHE ve Kermit BLANK (2006), “European Integration from the 1980s: State Centric vs Multi-Level Governance”, Mette E. SANGİOVANNİ (der.), Debates on European Integration, London: Palgrave Macmillan, ss. 357-377.
NUGENT, Neill (2001), The European Commission, London: Palgrave Macmillan.
NUGENT, Neill ve Mark RHİNARD (2016), “Is the European Commission Really in Decline”, Journal of Common Market Studies, 54(5), ss. 1199-1215.
PETERSON, John ve Elisabeth BOMBERG (1998), “Northern Enlargement and EU Decision Making”, P. H. Laurent ve M. Maresceau (der.), The State of the European Union: Deepening and Widening, Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers, s. 43-65.
PİERSON, Paul (2004), Politics in Time, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
POLLACK, Mark A. (1998), “The Engines of Integration? Supranational Autonomy and Influence in the European Union”, W. Sandholz ve A. S. Sweet (der.), European Integration and Supranational Integration, Oxford: Oxford University Press, ss. 217-249.
--- (2003), The Engines of European Integration: Delegation, Agency and Agenda-Setting in the European Union, Oxford University Press.
RİDDERVOLD, Marianne ve Guri ROSÉN (2016), “Trick and Threat: How the Commission and the European Parliament Exert Influence in EU Foreign and Security Policies”, Journal of European Integration, 38 (6), ss. 687-702.
RİNGE, Nils (2005), “Government-Opposition Dynamics in the European Union: The Santer Commission Resignation Crisis”, European Journal of Political Research, 44, ss. 671-696.
ROSÉN, Guri (2016),“A Match Made in Heaven? Explaining Patterns of Cooperation between the Commission and the European Parliament”, Journal of European Integration, 38(4), ss. 409- 429.
SEİDEL, Katja (2010), The Process of Politics in Europe: The Rise of European Elites and Supranational Institutions, London: Palgrave Macmillan.
TSEBELİS, George, (1999), “Institutional Analysis of European Union”, European Community Studies Association Newsettler.
TSEBELİS, George ve Geoffrey GARRETT (2000), “Legislative Politics in the European Union”, European Union Politics, 1(1), ss. 9-36.
THOMSON, Robert (2009), “Actor Alignments in the European Union Before and After Enlargement”, European Journal of Political Research, 48 (6), ss. 756-781.
TOPAN, Angelina (2002), “The Resignation of the Santer-Commission: The Impact of Trust and Reputation”, European Integration Online Papers, 6(14).
WERNER, Benjamin (2016), “Why Is the Court of Justice of the European Union not More Contested? Three Mechanisms of Opposition Abatement”, Journal of Common Market Studies, 54 (6), ss. 1449-1464.
WESTLAKE, Martin (1997), “The Commission and the Parliament”, G. Edwards ve D. Spence (der.), The European Commission, Devon: Cartermill Publishing, 2. Baskı, ss. 239-263.