The second dissemination event organised by the Central European Academy in Budapest as part of the CEA Professors’ Network project was the author’s evening (lecture) combined with Q&A session „European Semester. Legal aspects”, which took place in Rzeszów, in a remote format, on 31 January 2024. This event was aimed at disseminating the results of research conducted by Dr. Habil. Grzegorz Pastuszko on the issues of the European Semester, focused on the problem of legal and non-legal opportunities for European Union institutions to exert influence on Member States and their social and economic policies using this instrument. It includes a presentation of selected issues by the author, as well a session of questions and answers.
The evening was officially opened by Dr. Hab. Grzegorz Pastuszko, who welcomed the guests and then emphasised the nature of the event and what it entailed. He made it clear that the event was part of a project prepared by the Central European Academy in Budapest: CEA Professors’ Network and serves to disseminate the results of scientific research related to selected aspects of the European Semester.
These words were addressed to the invited guests, among whom, on the one hand, there were invited research workers, and on the other – the vast majority – students of the University of Rzeszów and other universities and research centers, including foreign ones. The total number of listeners was approximately 80-90 people.
The meeting was divided into two parts. In the first part, Dr. Habil. Grzegorz Pastuszko presented his scientific findings made as part of research on the issues of the European Semester. He explained to the participants what this procedure is and what significance it has from the point of view of the process of shaping mutual relations between the Brussels decision-making center and the Member States. He devoted a lot of space here to key issues allowing for understanding the basic issues related to the European Semester, but he also broadly referred to two interesting thematic threads that are not very exposed in science, i. e. the problem of formulating recommendations by EU institutions regarding respect for the principle in a given Member State rule of law (i. e., by definition, a thematic area that is formally very loosely, if at all, related to the European Semester) and the problem of the impact of the European Semester on the phenomenon of federalization of the political system of the European Union.
In the first case, he drew attention of listeners to the European Union’s attempts to formulate assessments and suggestions that have been observed for several years, specifically since 2019, regarding the issue of the rule of law in the Member States, to be exact – the system of judicial authorities. As he raised, during his lecture, the content of some documents (so-called specific national recommendations, which will be discussed in subsequent parts of this text) clearly shows that the competent EU bodies deem it appropriate to point out problems related to the rule of law in a given country and – as a result – emphasize expectations regarding the repair of the existing state of affairs. In this way – according to Grzegorz Pastuszko – the European Semester, although its intended purpose is economic and social, becomes yet another procedure allowing the rule of law agenda to be imposed on national authorities. This takes place even though the applicable legal provisions, especially treaty provisions, do not provide for such an option expressis verbis. As one may assume, the activities undertaken within it are a manifestation of the political ambitions of the EU’s centers of power rather than an expression of strict application and implementation of legal regulations. For this reason, they must be combined with the long-standing efforts at the Community level to consolidate and federalize the political system of the European Union. Finally, for this part of the speech, he exposed that threads related to the rule of law appear in specific country recommendation actions addressed only to those countries where EU institutions identify problems in this area; this is shown by the analysis of the documents in question, which clearly indicates that the „targets” of the EU institutions are usually countries that have been subjected in the past to other procedures aimed at strengthening the internal mechanisms of the rule of law (the main addressees of this type of recommendations are Hungary, Poland, Romania and Bulgaria).
In the second case, Grzegorz Pastuszko presented the mechanisms accompanying the phenomenon of federalisation of the European Union. He explained namely what the phenomenon of federalization that has been going on for decades is, and then inform what the basic construction elements and goals of the Semester are. In doing so, he exposed a role of country specific recommendations in this sphere by arguing that although the recommendations used in the European Semester procedure and sent by the relevant EU institutions to national authorities are non-binding in nature, they can be used to effectively influence the decision-making processes carried out in a Member State. His main reflexion was that however the European Semester it is based on the assumption of „(…) close policy dialogue between EU institutions and Member States, including drafting, approving and adopting country reports, recommendations and National Reform Programs (NRPs)” (S. Zillmer and others, Effective decentralisation in the context of the European Semester and beyond, Report prepared for the European Committee of the Regions European Union, 2023, p. 6), it actually shifts „(…) the balance substantially towards the European Commission in an attempt to strengthen its mandate as a supervisory and corrective agent, particularly in the eurozone” (Ch. Schweiger, Parliamentary Scrutiny of the European Semester: The Case of Poland, „Politics and Governance” 2021, vol. 9, no. 3, p. 125). Therefore, in his opinion, we are dealing here with another version of the increase in the power of EU institutions within the framework of economic governance and thus with a further element of deepening the process of federalization of the Union. Let us recall that it was already written about earlier instruments in the field of economic governance that these developments, which were „(…) intergovernmental means, with the European Council playing a central role (the so-called Union method) through measures such as intergovernmental treaties (cf. Treaty on Stability, Coordination and Governance in the Economic and Monetary Union) and informal intergovernmental bargains (notably between Germany and France)” were ” (…) seen as giving rise to an executive-dominated federalism that is quite impervious to parliamentary oversight and control” (J. Habermas, The Crisis of the European Union: A Response, Cambridge 2012, p. 223; B. Crum, Saving the Euro at the Cost of Democracy?, „Journal of Common Market Studies” 2013, vol. 53, no. 5, p. 614-630). Last but not least in this context, he pointed to the nature of the federalism developing in the European Union. He argued, namely, that there is „(…) a flexible relationship between federal and state governments in which both work together on a variety of issues and programs”, and a clear contrast to „(…) the model of dual federalism, which maintains that the national and state governments have distinct and separate government functions (Robert Schütze says that the cooperative model of federalism was being created intentionally for years. In his opinion: „In the last twenty years, the European Union has even constitutionalised the philosophy of cooperative federalism by means of two novel constitutional devises: the principle of subsidiarity and complementary competences” – R. Schütze, From Dual to Cooperative Federalism: The Changing Structure of European Law, „Oxford Studies in European Law” 2009). In doing so, he added that it is indicated that it remains determined „(…) a functional division of powers among different levels of government: while the central level makes the laws, the federal units are responsible for implementing them. In this system, the vast majority of competences are ‘concurrent’ or ‘shared’. This functional division of labor requires a strong representation of the interests of the federal units at the central level, not only in order to ensure an efficient implementation of federal policies, but also in order to prevent federal units from being reduced to mere ‘administrative agents’ of the federal government” (T. A. Börzel, What Can Federalism Teach Us About the European Union? The German Experience, Paper prepared for the Conference „Governing together in the New Europe“, Robinson College, Cambridge, 12-13 April 2003, p. 5). He also pointed out that it is also the so-called „hidden federalism”, characterized by the lack of manifestation of pro-federal intentions by the elites promoting it and the lack of participation of citizens themselves in the process of its creation. As noted in the literature on the subject, it is (…) developed as a process, is driven and dominated by elites in the absence of a demos, and is legitimized by the system’s output–economic growth, peace, and stability (B. Kovacevic, Europe’s Hidden Federalism: Federal Experiences of European Integration, London and New York 2017, p. 15). Finally, finally „asymmetric federalism”, which leads to an asymmetry of power between countries of key importance in the EU and peripheral ones (T. Grosse, Semestr Europejski: poprawa zarządzania czy zmiana ustrojowa?, „Analiza Natolińska” 2013, no. 7, p. 14-15).
The second part included a Questions & Answers session, in which Dr. Habil. Grzegorz Pastuszko answered questions sent to him by the listeners. There were several interesting questions related to the issues raised during the lecture. In particular, the participants wanted to find out whether the European Semester is the only instrument for integrating and, consequently, federalizing the political system of the European Union; whether the actions undertaken within it are effective and therefore have a clear impact on the economies of the Member States; whether the European Semester has a positive or negative impact on the functioning of the Polish economy.
After answering the last scheduled conference point, Dr. Habil. Grzegorz Pastuszko ceremoniously closed the meeting, thanking the participants for their interest and patience and expressed hope that in the future there will be an opportunity for similar meetings to popularize knowledge of European Union law.
