Recently, we have assisted to two developments in the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP): the Commission has proposed to extend the use of qualified majority voting by the Council to some aspects of the CFSP. In addition, the Court of Justice has widely interpreted the provisions of the Treaties recognising, by way of exception, its competence to rule on the legality of CFSP acts setting up individual restrictive measures. In the light of these developments, it may be wondered whether the CFSP is gradually seeing a mitigation of its specific character. The conclusion that may be drawn from this study is that, although there is evidence of normalization of the CFSP with respect to other policies, it is the Member States that have the last word and that should change the Treaties in order to fully normalise this policy. This essay also considers the use of the provisions of the CFSP as the legal basis of international agreements. In particular, a recent judgement (C-244/17), concerning the legal basis of an act adopting the position of the Union in an organism set up by an international agreement, will be briefly examined. The Court annulled the challenged act, on the ground that its legal basis, including both provisions of the CFSP and non-CFSP provisions, was incorrect. For the Court the inclusion of the CFSP provisions was not justified. The implication of the judgement is that it may be more difficult for the Council tocombine CFSP and non-CFSP provisions of the Treaties when concluding an international agreement. However, this does not mean that combination is excluded
Recenti sviluppi in materia di PESC: verso l’attenuazione della sua specificità?
Sara Poli
2019-01-01
Abstract
Recently, we have assisted to two developments in the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP): the Commission has proposed to extend the use of qualified majority voting by the Council to some aspects of the CFSP. In addition, the Court of Justice has widely interpreted the provisions of the Treaties recognising, by way of exception, its competence to rule on the legality of CFSP acts setting up individual restrictive measures. In the light of these developments, it may be wondered whether the CFSP is gradually seeing a mitigation of its specific character. The conclusion that may be drawn from this study is that, although there is evidence of normalization of the CFSP with respect to other policies, it is the Member States that have the last word and that should change the Treaties in order to fully normalise this policy. This essay also considers the use of the provisions of the CFSP as the legal basis of international agreements. In particular, a recent judgement (C-244/17), concerning the legal basis of an act adopting the position of the Union in an organism set up by an international agreement, will be briefly examined. The Court annulled the challenged act, on the ground that its legal basis, including both provisions of the CFSP and non-CFSP provisions, was incorrect. For the Court the inclusion of the CFSP provisions was not justified. The implication of the judgement is that it may be more difficult for the Council tocombine CFSP and non-CFSP provisions of the Treaties when concluding an international agreement. However, this does not mean that combination is excludedI documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
