IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/poango/v9y2021i1p272-280.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

To What Extent Can the CJEU Contribute to Increasing the EU Legislative Process’ Transparency?

Author

Listed:
  • Benjamin Bodson

    (Centre for International and European Law, Catholic University of Louvain, Belgium)

Abstract

Alongside other actors such as the European Ombudsman, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) plays what looks like, at first sight, a key role in improving the transparency of EU legislative procedures. To take two relatively recent examples, the De Capitani v. European Parliament (2018) judgment was perceived as a victory by those in favor of increased transparency of EU legislative procedures at the stage of trilogues, as was the ClientEarth v. European Commission (2018) judgment regarding the pre-initiative stage. Both rulings emphasize the need for “allowing citizens to scrutinize all the information which has formed the basis of a legislative act…[as] a precondition for the effective exercise of their democratic rights” ( ClientEarth v. European Commission , 2018, §84; De Capitani v. European Parliament , 2018, §80). Nevertheless, while the CJEU’s case law may indeed contribute to improving the legislative process’ transparency, its impact on the latter is inherently limited and even bears the potential of having a perverse effect. This article sheds light on the limits of the CJEU’s capacity to act in this field and the potential effects of its case law on the EU institutions’ attitudes or internal organization.

Suggested Citation

  • Benjamin Bodson, 2021. "To What Extent Can the CJEU Contribute to Increasing the EU Legislative Process’ Transparency?," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(1), pages 272-280.
  • Handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v9:y:2021:i:1:p:272-280
    DOI: 10.17645/pag.v9i1.3969
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/3969
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17645/pag.v9i1.3969?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v9:y:2021:i:1:p:272-280. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: António Vieira or IT Department (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.