Abstract
This chapter investigates leadership in foreign and security policy and European Union (EU) affairs, examining decision-making and division of labor between the president and the prime minister. In order to grasp the complexity of intra-executive policy coordination in these areas, it highlights the interdependence between foreign and EU policies. The chapter shows that intra-executive coordination is most developed in foreign and security policy and that Finland, Lithuania, and Romania normally manage to speak with one voice in external relations. It also provides evidence of constitutional rules about jurisdictions bending in favor of presidents. This applies particularly to representation in the European Council.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Perustuslakivaliokunnan mietintö 10/1998 (PeVM 10/1998 vp—HE 1/1998 vp). Hallituksen esitys uudeksi Suomen Hallitusmuodoksi, 26; see also Hallituksen esitys Eduskunnalle uudeksi Suomen Hallitusmuodoksi (HE 1/1998 vp): 146.
- 2.
According to the Venice Commission this was foreseen by the drafters of constitution: “In defining the area of governmental primacy by reference to an entity, the EU, whose competence is continually shifting/expanding, the framers of the Finnish Constitution have deliberately provided for a growing area of primary governmental competence in foreign policy. The growth of common positions and strategies in the EU common foreign and security policy (CFSP), e.g. as regards what has traditionally been a crucially important part of Finnish foreign policy, its relationship with Russia, means that issues previously regarded as purely bilateral will now be regarded, depending on the circumstances, as partially, largely, or wholly, within the Government’s primacy.” Venice Commission, ‘Opinion on the Constitution of Finland’, Opinion No. 420/2007, Strasbourg, 7 April 2008.
- 3.
Arto Astikainen, Presidentti ei voi olla reservissä, Helsingin Sanomat, 24 December 2003.
- 4.
In May 2010 the government appointed, against the views of the president, the Finnish delegation to the EU-LAC (Latin America and Caribbean) summit. Hallitus otti loputkin EU-asioista itselleen, Helsingin Sanomat, 8 May 2010.
- 5.
The Sipilä cabinet has a specific ministerial working group on Russia that brings together the president and those cabinet ministers interested in participating in its work.
- 6.
HE 60/2010, Hallituksen esitys Eduskunnalle laiksi Suomen perustuslain muuttamisesta.
- 7.
During her 12 years in office, President Halonen made 295 visits abroad (144 in her first term and 151 in the second term). During his first term Niinistö made 85 trips abroad (Mörttinen and Nurmi 2018: 184–185, 319–323).
- 8.
President Niinistö remarked in an interview about co-leadership that “the constitution explicitly states that the President of the Republic directs … in co-operation. I always pause in the middle of the sentence.” Ylen Ykkösaamu, 28 May 2016.
- 9.
Mika Kari, a Social Democratic MP and the vice-chair of the Defence Committee in the Eduskunta, had wished that the government would allocate substantially more resources to the president’s office, particularly in light of the more turbulent and fast-paced developments in international politics. Emphasizing the contacts with the foreign ministry, President Niinistö disagreed, stating his office does not need more resources. Mika Koskinen, Erikoishaastattelu: Presidentti Niinistö Sipilän roolista ulkopolitiikassa: “Aktiivisempi kuin yksikään muu pääministeri aikanani”, Iltalehti, 19 August 2018, https://www.iltalehti.fi/politiikka/a/201808192201145268
- 10.
As President Niinistö has repeatedly emphasized, in such situations the discussions in the European Council may deal with matters that fall under the co-leadership in foreign policy as regulated by Section 93 of the constitution. According to Niinistö there have been phone calls between him and the prime minister during the European Council dinners on two occasions, when the informal talks ventured into areas falling under the jurisdiction of the president. Ari Hakahuhta, Analyysi: Presidentti hillitsee jo puheita myyttisestä Putin-suhteesta—Niinistön asema ulkopolitiikan johtajana vahva. Yle, 29 August 2018, https://yle.fi/uutiset/3-10370652
- 11.
The Law Supplementing the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania with the Constitutional Act “On Membership of the Republic of Lithuania in the European Union” and Supplementing Article 150 of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania (No. IX-2343) of 13 July 2004, Valstybės žinios (Official Gazette), 2004, No. 111-4123.
- 12.
The discontinuation of the Council may have stemmed from the plan of President Paksas to use the body for coordinating EU policy as well. The role of the Council was seen as limited and there were also concerns about its constitutional status.
- 13.
In addition, new legislative changes were introduced which strengthen the powers of the president during times of war (Šlekys 2018).
- 14.
Prior to EU membership in 2003, President Paksas demanded a major role for the president and his office in the domestic coordination of European affairs. As the impeachment of Paksas coincided with joining the EU and the design of the national EU coordination system, the role of the president ended up being quite limited. Also the president’s office does not have sufficient resources for the daily management of EU issues (Maniokas and Vilpišauskas 2010: 22; Vilpišauskas 2015: 567).
- 15.
Before President Grybauskaité enforced the resignation of Vygaudas Ušackas in early 2010, the foreign minister and the president did not communicate in person for several months (Krupavičius 2013: 228–229).
- 16.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, press release, 13 November 2018, https://www.mae.ro/en/node/47431
- 17.
Hence, as in Lithuania, this undermines parliamentary accountability in EU affairs and especially regarding European Council meetings. Interestingly, in the midst of the conflict between Prime Minister Ponta and Băsescu about who represents Romania in the European Council, the parliament organized a special extraordinary plenary meeting of the two chambers after the European Council of 28–29 June 2012, with Ponta presenting a report on the summit. At the same time the parliament tried to adopt new legal provisions that would have strengthened the domestic accountability of the European Council, and particularly the participation rights of the legislature, but the law had to be modified as the Constitutional Court ruled that such provisions were unconstitutional. According to the original law, Romania could have been represented in the European Council either by the president or by the prime minister, and if the two leaders disagreed about who attends the summit, the parliament would have decided who leads the Romanian delegation to the European Council (Tacea 2015: 619, 626–627).
- 18.
Decision no. 683/27 June 2012; http://www.ccr.ro/files/products/D0683_12.pdf
- 19.
The blog of Prime Minister Ponta: http://blogponta.wordpress.com/2011/12/08/romania-cainele-surd-la-vanatoarea-europeana/
Bibliography
Anghel, V. (2018, November 20). Romania – The President’s ‘Breaking Bad’: When Does Negative Campaigning Work? Presidential Power blog. http://presidential-power.com/?p=8955
Apostolache, M. C. (2016). The Prime Minister and the Supreme Council of National Defence. Journal of Law and Administrative Sciences, 6, 45–57.
Bucur, C. (2013, October 18). Romania – Cohabitation. Presidential Power blog. http://presidential-power.com/?p=190
Bucur, C. (2016, March 16). Romania – President Iohannis’ Contested Performance and a Brief Assessment of His Exercise of Constitutional Powers. Presidential Power blog. http://presidential-power.com/?p=4614
Gärtner, L., Hörner, J., & Obholzer, L. (2011). National Coordination of EU Policy: A Comparative Study of the Twelve “New” Member States. Journal of Contemporary European Research, 7(1), 77–100.
Gherghina, S. (2013). Formal and Informal Powers in a Semi-Presidential Regime: The Case of Romania. In V. Hloušek et al. (Eds.), Presidents Above Parties? Presidents in Central and Eastern Europe, Their Formal Competencies and Informal Power (pp. 257–270). Brno: Masaryk University.
Gherghina, S., & Miscoiu, S. (2013). The Failure of Cohabitation: Explaining the 2007 and 2012 Institutional Crises in Romania. East European Politics & Societies and Cultures, 27(4), 668–684.
Hallberg, P., Martikainen, T., Nousiainen, J., & Tiikkainen, P. (2009). Presidentin valta: hallitsijanvallan ja parlamentarismin välinen jännite Suomessa 1919–2009. Helsinki: WSOY.
Hämäläinen, U. (2013). Niinistö mukautui yhteisjohtajaksi. In S. Tiihonen, M. Pohls, & J. Korppi-Tommola (Eds.), Presidentti johtaa: Suomalaisen valtiojohtamisen pitkä linja (pp. 279–300). Helsinki: Siltala.
Hovila, M. (2014). Tasavallan presidentti ja yhteistyökäytäntö ulkopolitiikassa – vuoden 2012 toimivallan uudistus. Lakimies, 112(3), 392–412.
Hyvärinen, A., & Raunio, T. (2014). Who Decides What EU Issues Ministers Talk About? Explaining Governmental EU Policy Co-ordination in Finland. Journal of Common Market Studies, 52(5), 1019–1034.
Krupavičius, A. (2013). Lithuania’s President: A Formal and Informal Power. In V. Hloušek et al. (Eds.), Presidents Above Parties? Presidents in Central and Eastern Europe, Their Formal Competencies and Informal Power (pp. 205–232). Brno: Masaryk University.
Maniokas, K., & Vilpišauskas, R. (2010). National Coordination of European Policy in Lithuania: Analysis of a Double Transformation (Unpublished Paper).
Mörttinen, M., & Nurmi, L. (2018). Sauli Niinistö: Mäntyniemen herra. Helsinki: Into.
Niskanen, M. (2006). Onko sotilaallinen kriisinhallintalaki ulkopolitiikan johtamista vai EU-asia? Lakimies, 104(2), 244–256.
Niskanen, M. (2009). Tasavallan presidentin ulko- ja turvallisuuspoliittinen päätösvalta Suomen valtiosäännössä. Rovaniemi: Acta Universitatis Lapponiensis 170, Lapin yliopistokustannus.
Oikeusministeriö. (2002). Selvitys perustuslakiuudistuksen toimeenpanosta. Perustuslain seurantatyöryhmän mietintö. Helsinki: Oikeusministeriön työryhmämietintöjä 7.
Park, A. (2018a, July 11). Lithuania – President Grybauskaite in an Intra-institutional Tug of War. Presidential Power blog. http://presidential-power.com/?p=8427
Park, A. (2018b, April 11). Lithuania – President Grybauskaite on an Extended “Vacation”? Presidential Power blog. http://presidential-power.com/?p=7943
Perju, V. (2015). The Romanian Double Executive and the 2012 Constitutional Crisis. International Journal of Constitutional Law, 13(1), 246–278.
Raunio, T. (2008). Parlamentaarinen vastuu ulkopolitiikkaan: Suomen ulkopolitiikan johtajuus uuden perustuslain aikana. Politiikka, 50(4), 250–265.
Raunio, T. (2012). Semi-Presidentialism and European Integration: Lessons from Finland for Constitutional Design. Journal of European Public Policy, 19(4), 567–584.
Raunio, T. (2016). Refusing to Be Sidelined: The Engagement of the Finnish Eduskunta in Foreign Affairs. Scandinavian Political Studies, 39(4), 312–332.
Raunio, T. (2018). Parliament as an Arena for Politicisation: The Finnish Eduskunta and Crisis Management Operations. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 20(1), 158–174.
Šlekys, D. (2018, August 22–25). Defence Politics and Reshaping of the Lithuanian Semi-Presidential Regime. Paper presented at the ECPR General Conference, Hamburg.
Tacea, A. (2015). The Slow Adaptation of a New Member State: The Romanian Parliament and European Integration. In C. Hefftler, C. Neuhold, O. Rozenberg, & J. Smith (Eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of National Parliaments and the European Union (pp. 613–631). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Tiilikainen, T. (2003). Suomen ulkopoliittinen johtamisjärjestelmä uuden perustuslain mukaan. Politiikka, 45(3), 212–222.
Vilpišauskas, R. (2015). Parliamentary Scrutiny of EU Affairs in Lithuania: The Dog That Rarely Barks. In C. Hefftler, C. Neuhold, O. Rozenberg, & J. Smith (Eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of National Parliaments and the European Union (pp. 563–577). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Yli-Huttula, T. (2018). Presidentti ja porvarivalta: Ristiriitoja ja yhteistoimintaa tasavallan sisäpiirissä. Helsinki: Otava.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Raunio, T., Sedelius, T. (2020). Decision-Making in Foreign and Security Policies and EU Affairs. In: Semi-Presidential Policy-Making in Europe. Palgrave Studies in Presidential Politics. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-16431-7_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-16431-7_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-16430-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-16431-7
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)