ANALIZA REUNIUNII SPECIALE A CONSILIULUI EUROPEAN DIN IULIE 2020: SCHIMBĂRI INSTITUŢIONALE ŞI COMISIA EUROPEANĂ
AN ANALYSIS OF THE EUROPEAN COUNCIL’S JULY 2020 SPECIAL MEETING: INSTITUTIONAL CHANGES AND THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION

Summary/Abstract: The rapid and drastic developments in public health caused by the Covid-19 pandemic have put enormous pressure on the economies of all EU member countries. This has led, in turn, to pressure being put on European governments and leaders to find solutions in order to alleviate the strong economic impact of this crisis. In the conclusions of the Special meeting of the European Council from 17-21 July 2020, the European Council explains that emergency measures have to be adopted in order to prevent “a collapse of the economy”, and on “mitigating the socio-economic damage”. Even though the subjects discussed were related to the economy, especially in the form of two economic packages – Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) and a Recovery effort in the context of Next Generation EU (NGEU) – their implications are not limited to the economy, but touch the on the institutional and constitutional order of the European Union. The fact that changes are needed in order to adapt the European Union to these new economic challenges is not hidden by the Council, which states that, in order to deal with the social and economic damage, transformation, convergence and resilience are needed. The severe economic problems that the EU member states are facing have appeared in an already complicated political landscape, the rule of law being dangerously bent in some states. In the last years, there have been discussions about the EU protecting the rule of law in its member states, and the possible solution of conditioning EU funds. This is actually another instance in which the Council has extended the rights and powers of the Commission, by introducing a ‘conditionality regime’. Its purpose is to protect the EU budget, as well as the NGEU. The actual measures were not named, only the two aspects to be protected: the EU’s financial interests and the respect of the rule of law. The Council’s concluded that the Commission is to propose a set of measures which will be adopted by the Council using the qualified majority decision making procedure. Analysts have divided opinions on the lack of clarity regarding the actual terms of the conditionality regime: some consider that the ambiguity is strategic, so that leaders that have been criticised for their transgressions regarding the rule of law do not oppose the conditionality regime, while other consider that this could mean that veto powers could be involved, which would make this procedure ineffective. In my opinion, the EU has been preparing for a conditionality regime for a while and this is a concrete step into this direction; the initial ambiguity was necessary in order to avoid strong opposition from the political leaders that are directly affected. In conclusion, there were several historic decisions with impact on the functioning of the European Commission at the European Council’s July 2020 special meeting. Some were related to crisis situations only, such as the authorization to borrow funds directly, the while others have long-lasting impact, such as the concrete steps in the direction of establishing a conditionality regime. Even though many of these institutional changes are not permanent and have a clear end-date, these could also provide a model for future crises of the EU, as well as consolidate the role of the Commission in special circumstances.

• Details
• Contents