Intergovernmentalism

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In international law , European law and political science, intergovernmentalism (also intergovernmentalism , from Latin inter , “between”, and French governor , “govern”) is the principle of intergovernmental cooperation between states within an international organization. Examples of this are the United Nations or, in some cases, the European Union , where the principle of intergovernmentalism prevails in the field of common foreign and security policy . This means that the decision-making authority remains with the states alone (which in particular requires a principle of unanimity ).

Significance under international law

In the teaching of international law, intergovernmentalism means that countries make decisions together but remain sovereign themselves. This intergovernmental cooperation is typical of most international organizations today, such as B. the UN or the OSCE .

Antonym of intergovernmental cooperation, the concept of supranationality , which has become a key concept for the European Community , means in international law that the decisions made supranationally in the EC are made autonomously by the EC organs and are binding for all member states. This has also applied to the European Union since the Treaty of Lisbon . Even within the EU, however, there are areas such as the common foreign and security policy (CFSP), which are based on intergovernmental cooperation between governments.

Intergovernmental elements in the European Union

In the Council of the European Union , part of the EU's institutional triangle alongside the Commission and the European Parliament , the principle of intergovernmentalism prevails in the area of foreign and security policy. Only with joint actions and viewpoints acting Council with a qualified majority . The individual states can, however, assert important national reasons, so that the Council only decides whether the matter is submitted to the European Council for a unanimous decision (see Art. 31 para. 2 sub-para. 2 TEU); this variant is a modified special form of the Luxembourg Compromise of 1966. A resolution is, however, also considered unanimous if individual members abstain. These members are not forced to implement the resolutions or bear the resulting costs (constructive abstention). However, the abstaining member accepts that the decision is binding on the Union and that it must not hinder the Union's action within the meaning of the decision.

In contrast to this is the principle of supranationality , which means that the states combined in an organization give up areas of sovereignty in favor of this organization; the institutions belonging to the organization can then make binding decisions for the individual states. The EU member states have ceded competencies to the EU in many areas and are bound by decisions that are made using the so-called community method. EU institutions that are independent of the national governments, such as the European Commission and the European Parliament, play a key role in this. The individual states are also involved in these decisions via the Council of the EU, but have no right of veto .

Normative dimension

In addition to the description of intergovernmental manifestations and decision-making mechanisms in the institutional system of the EU, political science also describes intergovernmentalism as a desirable or normative goal of a school of thought in the integration process of the European Union. The ideal model for such a distribution of competences is the Europe of the Fatherlands . Intergovernmentalism then means the (demand for) retention of national sovereignty in contrast to the line of thought of supranationalism , which pleads for an expansion of competencies in favor of supranational institutions and organs.

In the history of the European Union there have been influential representatives of the intergovernmentalist school who have decisively shaped the political system of the union of states. The European political orientation of the former French President Charles de Gaulle is often cited as an example of intergovernmental negotiation and decision-making mechanisms. France stayed away from the meetings of the Council of Ministers from July 1965 to January 1966 because of its resolute rejection of the impending introduction of the qualified majority as a voting mode, which was therefore quorate for months. This tactic of non-negotiation, known as the empty chair policy, only resulted in the Luxembourg Compromise after extensive use of the informal negotiation channels , which provided for a principle of unanimity (and thus a de facto right of veto for each member state). In so doing, De Gaulle had set a sign for France of the self-assertion of sovereign rights; previously he had failed with his Fouchet plans in 1961/1962.

See also

Web links