Commission Discretion

  • R. Eljalill Tauschinsky


This book seeks to find an explanation and a normative frame for the relationship between the Commission and the persons subject to its rule-making. This relationship is not entirely uncharted territory. Instead, there are a number of theoretical vantage points which offer views on it. I will enter the discussion of the relationship between the Commission and its subjects from these well established theories relating to non-legislative rule-making as ‘administrative’ action, to Commission rule-making being defined by the rule of law and to this rule-making as a democratic exercise of authority. This chapter discusses the delegated and implementing rule-making from these three perspectives and draws insight into how the relationship between the Commission and the persons subject to its rule-making should be framed.


  1. Alemanno A, Meeuwse A (2013) Impact assessment of EU non-legislative rulemaking: the missing link in ‘new comitology’. Eur Law J 19(1):76Google Scholar
  2. Arthurs HW (1979) Rethinking administrative law: a slightly Dicey business. Osgoode Hall Law J 17(1):1Google Scholar
  3. Badura P (1968) Auftrag und Grenzen der Verwaltung im sozialen Rechtsstaat. Die öffentliche Verwaltung 13–14:446Google Scholar
  4. Baier A (1986) Trust and antitrust. Ethics 96(2):231Google Scholar
  5. Baratta R (2016) Rule of law ‘dialogues’ within the EU: a legal assessment. Hague J Rule Law 8:357Google Scholar
  6. Barnes B (1988) The nature of power. Polity Press, p 58Google Scholar
  7. Bartolini S (2012) Special book review symposium power and legitimacy. Eur Const Law Rev 8:139Google Scholar
  8. Bedner A (2010) An elementary approach to the rule of law. Hague J Rule Law 2:48Google Scholar
  9. Blair MM, Stout LA (2001) Trust, trustworthiness, and the behavioral foundations of corporate law. Univ Pa Law Rev 149(6):1735Google Scholar
  10. Braithwaite J (1998) Institutionalizing Distrust, Enculturing Trust. In: Braithwaite V, Levi M (eds) Trust & Governance. Russell Sage Foundation, p 344Google Scholar
  11. Brandsma G-J, Blom-Hansen J (2017) Controlling the EU-executive? The politics of delegation in the European Union. Oxford University PublishingGoogle Scholar
  12. Bugarič B (2007) Openness and transparency in public administration: challenges for public law. Wisconsin Int Law J 22(3):484Google Scholar
  13. Calvert RL, McCubbins MD, Weingast BR (1989) A theory of political control and agency discretion. Am J Polit Sci 33(3):588Google Scholar
  14. Canovan M (2002) Taking politics to the people: populism as the ideology of democracy. In: Meny Y, Surel Y (eds) Democracies and the populist challenge. Palgrave, p 29Google Scholar
  15. Chernilo D (2011) The critique of methodological nationalism: theory and history. Thesis Eleven 106(1):98Google Scholar
  16. Coleman JS (1990) Foundations of social theory. Belknap Press, p 91 et seqGoogle Scholar
  17. Cunningham F (2002) Theories of democracy: a critical introduction. Routledge, p 9Google Scholar
  18. Dalton RJ (2005) The social transformation of trust in government. Int Rev Sociol 15(1):133Google Scholar
  19. den Heijer M, Tauschinsky E (2013) Where human rights meet administrative law: essential elements and limits to delegation: European Court of Justice, Grand Chamber C-355/10: European Parliament v. Council of the European Union. Eur Const Law Rev 9(3):513Google Scholar
  20. deWitte B (2012) Special book review symposium power and legitimacy. Eur Const Law Rev 8:148Google Scholar
  21. Dicey AV (1956) Introduction to the study of the law of the constitution, 9th edn. Macmillan & Co, p 60Google Scholar
  22. Doernberg DL (1985) “We the people”: John Locke, collective constitutional rights, and standing to challenge government action. Calif Law Rev 73:52Google Scholar
  23. Dunn J (1988) Trust and political agency. In: Gambetta D (ed) Trust: making and breaking cooperative relations. Basil Blackwell, p 287Google Scholar
  24. Endicott T (2014) Arbitrariness. Can J Law Jurisp 28(1):49Google Scholar
  25. Fallon RH (1997) “The rule of law” as a concept in constitutional discourse. Columbia Law Rev 97(1):1Google Scholar
  26. Farina C, ABA Committee on Government Standards (1993) Keeping faith: government ethics & government ethics regulation. Adm Law Rev 45:287Google Scholar
  27. Finn P (1994) Public trust and public accountability. Griffiths Law Rev 3(2):224Google Scholar
  28. Fisher E (2007) Risk regulation and administrative constitutionalism. HartGoogle Scholar
  29. Forstyh A (1999) Administrative discretion and urban and regional planners’ values. J Plan Lit 14(1):5Google Scholar
  30. Fortsakis T (2005) Principles governing good administration. Eur Public Law 11(2):207Google Scholar
  31. Fountain JE (2001) Paradoxes of public sector customer service. Governance 14(1):55Google Scholar
  32. Franchino F (2000) The Commission’s executive discretion: information and comitology. J Theor Polit 12(2):155Google Scholar
  33. Frankel T (1983) Fiduciary law. Calif Law Rev 71(3):795Google Scholar
  34. Frankel T (1995) Fiduciary duties as default rules. Oregon Law Rev 74:1209Google Scholar
  35. Fuller LL (1973) The morality of law, Revised edn. Yale University PressGoogle Scholar
  36. Gaus JM (1931) Notes on administration. Am Polit Sci Rev 25(1):120Google Scholar
  37. Gaus JM (1947) Reflections on administration. University Alabama, p 23Google Scholar
  38. Habermas J (1996) Between facts and norms: contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy. William Rehg tr, MIT Press, pp 169, 186 et seqGoogle Scholar
  39. Habermas J (2008) The constitutionalization of international law and the legitimation problems of a constitution for world society. Constellations 15(4):444Google Scholar
  40. Hardin R (1998) Trust in Government. In: Braithwaite V, Levi M (eds) Trust & Governance. Russell Sage, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  41. Harré R (1999) Trust and its surrogates: psychological foundations of political process. In: Warren ME (ed) Democracy & trust. Cambridge University Press, p 258Google Scholar
  42. Hawthorn G (1988) Three ironies in trust. In: Gambetta D (ed) Trust: making and breaking cooperative relations. Basil BlackwellGoogle Scholar
  43. Hayek FA (1973) Law, legislation and liberty: rules and order, Routledge & Kegan Paul, vol I, pp 72–73 and 124–144Google Scholar
  44. Held D (1996) Models of democracy, 2nd edn. Stanford University Press, p 157Google Scholar
  45. Held V (1968) On the meaning of trust. Ethics 78(2):156Google Scholar
  46. Heydon D (2003) Judicial activism and the death of the rule of law. Quadrant 47(1–2):9Google Scholar
  47. Hodgkinson C (1978) Towards a philosophy of administration. Blackwell, Oxford, p 3Google Scholar
  48. Hofmann H, Rowe G, Türk A (2011) Administrative law and policy of the European Union. Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  49. Holmes S (1995) Passions and constraint: on the theory of liberal democracy. University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
  50. Hood CC (1991) A public Management for all seasons? Public Adm 69:3Google Scholar
  51. Isiksel T (2012) Special book review symposium power and legitimacy. Eur Const Law Rev 8:128Google Scholar
  52. Joerges C (2004) The challenges of Europeanization in the realm of private law: a plea for a new legal discipline. Duke J Comp Int Law 14:149Google Scholar
  53. Kelemen D (2011) The European Union’s legitimacy: administrative not constitutional, or administrative then constitutional? Columbia J Eur Law 18:157Google Scholar
  54. Kelman HC, Hamilton VL (1989) Crimes of obedience: towards a social psychology of authority and responsibility. Yale University Press, New Haven, p 54 et seqGoogle Scholar
  55. Koehn D (2001) Confucian trustworthiness and the practice of business in China. Bus Ethics Q 11(3):415Google Scholar
  56. Kohler-Koch B, Rittberger B (2006) The ‘governance turn’ in EU studies. J Common Mark Stud 44:27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Kuo M-S (2012) From administrative law to administrative legitimation? Transnational administrative law and the process of European integration. Int Comp Law Q 61(4):855Google Scholar
  58. Lafarge F (2018) The impact of the better regulation policy on EU delegated and implementing acts rule-making. In: Tauschinsky E, Weiß W (eds) The legislative choice between delegated and implementing acts in EU law: walking a labyrinth. Edward ElgarGoogle Scholar
  59. Lagerspetz O, Hertzberg L (2013) Trust in Wittgenstein. In: Mäkelä P, Townley C (eds) Trust: analytical and applied perspective. RodopiGoogle Scholar
  60. Leisner W (1977) Rechtsstaat – ein Widerspruch in sich? Juristenzeitung 32(17):537Google Scholar
  61. Lenaerts K, Verhoeven A (2002) Institutional balance as a guarantee for democracy in EU governance. In: Joerges C, Dehousse R (eds) Good governance in Europe’s integrated market. Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  62. Lindseth P (2011) Power and legitimacy: reconciling Europe and the Nation State. Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  63. Lindseth P (2012) Constitutionalism beyond the state? The administrative character of European governance revisited. Cardozo Law Rev 33(5):101Google Scholar
  64. Luhmann N (1968) Vertrauen: ein Mechanismus zur Reduktion sozialer Komplexität. Stuttgart, p 23, 31Google Scholar
  65. Mak E, Taekema S (2016) The European Union’s rule of law agenda: identifying its core and contextualizing its application. Hague J Rule Law 8:25Google Scholar
  66. Maloy JS (2009) Two concepts of trust. J Polit 71(2):492Google Scholar
  67. Mansbridge J (1999) Altruistic trust. In: Warren ME (ed) Democracy & trust. Cambridge University Press, p 294 et seqGoogle Scholar
  68. Mashaw JL (1981) Administrative due process: the quest for a dignitary theory. Bost Univ Law Rev 885:61Google Scholar
  69. Mayntz R (1978) Soziologie deröffentlichen Verwaltung. Juristischer Verlag CF Müller, p 5Google Scholar
  70. Mendes J (2009) Good Administration in EU Law and the European Code of Good Administrative Behaviour. EUI Working Paper 2009/09, FlorenceGoogle Scholar
  71. Mendes J (2011) Participation in EU rule-making: a rights-based approach. Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  72. Mendes J (2016a) The making of delegated and implementing acts: legitimacy beyond inter- institutional balances. In: Bergstöm CF, Ritleng D (eds) Law-making by the EU Commission: the new system. Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  73. Mendes J (2016b) Discretion, care and public interests in the EU administration: probing the limits of the law. Common Mark Law Rev 53:419Google Scholar
  74. Mitchell LE (2001) The importance of being trusted. Bost Univ Law Rev 591:81Google Scholar
  75. Natelson RG (2004) The constitution and the public trust. Buffalo Law Rev 52:1077Google Scholar
  76. Nehl H-P (2009) Good administration as a procedural right and/ or general principle? In: Hofmann H, Türk A (eds) Legal challenges in EU administrative law. Edward Elgar. p 336 et seq, 339 et seqGoogle Scholar
  77. Nettesheim M (2005) Developing a theory of democracy for the European Union. Berkeley J Int Law 23(2):358Google Scholar
  78. Nullmeier F, Pritzlaff T (2010) The great chain of legitimacy – justifying transnational democracy. TranState Working Paper 123, BremenGoogle Scholar
  79. O’Neill O (2002) A question of trust. Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  80. Offe C (1999) How can we trust our fellow citizens? In: Warren ME (ed) Democracy & trust. Cambridge University Press, p 51Google Scholar
  81. Olsen JP (2003) Towards a European administrative space? J Eur Publ Policy 10(4):506Google Scholar
  82. Palombella G (2016) Beyond legality – before democracy: rule of law caveats in the EU two-level system. In: Closa C, Kochenov D (eds) Reinforcing rule of law oversight in the European Union. Cambridge University Press, p 37Google Scholar
  83. Patterson O (1999) Liberty against the democratic state: on the historical contemporary sources of American distrust. In: Warren ME (ed) Democracy & trust. Cambridge University Press, p 153Google Scholar
  84. Peerenboom R (2004) Varieties of rule of law. In: Peerenboom R (ed) Asian discourses of rule of law. Routledge, p 2Google Scholar
  85. Pesch U (2005) The Predicaments of Publicness. LeidenGoogle Scholar
  86. Pettit P (1998) Republican theory and political trust. In: Braithwaite V, Levi M (eds) Trust & governance. Russel Sage Foundation, p 300 et seqGoogle Scholar
  87. Peuker E (2011) Bürokratie und Demokratie in Europa. Mohr SiebeckGoogle Scholar
  88. Philp M (2009) Delimiting democratic accountability. Polit Stud 57:28Google Scholar
  89. Raz J (2001) Liberty and trust. In: George R (ed) Natural law, liberalism, and morality: contemporary essays. Oxford University Press, p 122 et seqGoogle Scholar
  90. Ribstein LE (2011) Fencing fiduciary duties. Bost Univ Law Rev 899:91Google Scholar
  91. Robertson KG (1982) Public secrets: a study in the development of government secrecy, New York, p 19 et seqGoogle Scholar
  92. Rohr JA (2002) Dicey’s ghost and administrative law. Adm Soc 34(1):8Google Scholar
  93. Rothstein B, Teorell J (2008) What is quality of government? A theory of impartial government institutions. Governance 21(2):165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Schmidt-Aßmann E (2004) Der Rechtsstaat. In: Isensee J, Kirchhof P (eds) Handbuch des Staatsrechts, vol II, 3rd edn. p 542Google Scholar
  95. Schmidt VA (2015) The Eurozone’s Crisis of Democratic Legitimacy: Can the EU Rebuild Public Trust and Support for European Economic Integration? European Economy Discussion Paper 015, Luxembourg, pp 40–48Google Scholar
  96. Schwarze J (2006) European administrative law, 2nd edn. Sweet and MaxwellGoogle Scholar
  97. Seidenfeld M (1992) A civic republican justification for the bureaucratic state. Harv Law Rev 105:1511Google Scholar
  98. Shapiro M (2001) The institutionalization of European administrative space. In: Sweet AS, Sandholtz W, Fligstein N (eds) The institutionalization of Europe. Oxford University Press, Oxford, p 94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Shapiro S (1987) The social control of impersonal trust. Am J Sociol 93(3):623Google Scholar
  100. Shapiro S (2012) The grammar of trust. In: Pixley J (ed) New perspectives on emotion in finance. RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
  101. Smith L (2015) Loyalty and politics: from case law to statute law. J Equity 9:130Google Scholar
  102. Snellen I (2002) Conciliation of rationalities: the essence of public administration. Adm Theory Pract 24(2):323Google Scholar
  103. Somek A (2004) Dogmatischer Pragmatismus: die Normativitätskrise der Europäischen Union. In: Hammer S, and others (eds) Demokratie und sozialer Rechtsstaat in Europa: Festschrift für Theo Öhlinger. Wien, p 53 et seqGoogle Scholar
  104. Somek A (2008) Individualism. Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  105. Sordi B (2010) Revolution, Rechtsstaat and the rule of law: historical reflections on the emergence of administrative law in Europe. In: Rose-Ackerman S, Lindseth P (eds) Comparative administrative law. Edward Elgar Publishing, p 33Google Scholar
  106. Stewart J, Clarke M (1987) The public service orientation: issues and dilemmas. Public Adm 65:161Google Scholar
  107. Stewart RB (1975) The reformation of American administrative law. Harv Law Rev 88(8):1667Google Scholar
  108. Stewart RB (2014) Remedying disregard in global regulatory governance: accountability, participation and responsiveness. Am J Int Law 108:211Google Scholar
  109. Tamanaha BZ (2004) On the rule of law: history, politics, theory. Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  110. Tames R, Rosemont H (1998) The analects of Confucius: a philosophical translation. Ballantine BooksGoogle Scholar
  111. Tomuschat C (1999) International law: ensuring the survival of mankind on the eve of a New Century. Recueil des cours: Collected Courses of the Hague Academy of International Law, vol 281. Martinus Nijhoff, p 95Google Scholar
  112. Tsakatika M (2005) Claims to legitimacy: the European Commission between continuity and change. J Common Mark Stud 43(1):193Google Scholar
  113. Tsakatika M (2008) Political responsibility and the European Union. Manchester University PressGoogle Scholar
  114. Tyler TR (1998) Trust and democratic governance. In: Braithwaite V, Levi M (eds) Trust & governance. Russel Sage Foundation, p 277Google Scholar
  115. Tyler TR, Huo YJ (2002) Trust in the law: encouraging cooperation with the police and the courts. Russell Sage Foundation, pp 62–63Google Scholar
  116. van Gestel R (2014) Primacy of the European legislature? Delegated rule-making and the decline of the “Transmission Belt” theory. Theory Pract Legis 2(1):33Google Scholar
  117. Vincze A (2018) Delegation versus implementation: a de-construction of the promise of the Lisbon treaty. In: Tauschinsky E, Weiß W (eds) The legislative choice between delegated and implementing acts in EU law: walking a labyrinth. Edward ElgarGoogle Scholar
  118. von Bogdandy A (2000) Information und Kommunikation in der Europäischen Union: föderale Strukturen in supranationalem Umfeld. In: Hoffmann-Riem W, Schmidt-Aßmann E (eds) Verwaltungsrecht in der Informationsgesellschaft. Nomos, p 150Google Scholar
  119. von Bogdandy A (2012) The European lesson for international democracy: the significance of Arts. 9-12 EU treaty for international organizations. Eur J Int Law 23(2):315, 326Google Scholar
  120. von Bogdandy A (2017) Jenseits der Rechtsgemeinschaft – Begriffsarbeit in der europäischen Sinn und Rechtsstaatlichkeitskrise. Eur Secur 4:487Google Scholar
  121. Waldron J (2002) Is the rule of law an essentially contested concept (in Florida)? Law Philos 21:137Google Scholar
  122. Waldron J (2012) How law protects dignity. Camb Law J 71(1):200Google Scholar
  123. Walker RM (2011) Market orientation and public service performance: new public management gone mad? Public Adm Rev 71(5):707Google Scholar
  124. Warren ME (1999) Democratic theory and trust. In: Warren ME (ed) Democracy and trust. Cambridge University Press, p 331Google Scholar
  125. Watson A (1962) The origins of Fiducia. Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte 79:329Google Scholar
  126. Weber M (1964) Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft. Köln, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  127. Wee C (2011) Xin, trust and confucius’ ethics. Philos East West 61(3):516Google Scholar
  128. Weil F (1987) The stranger, prudence, and trust in Hobbes’s theory. Theory Soc 759:15Google Scholar
  129. Wille A (2013) The normalization of the European Commission: politics and bureaucracy in the EU executive. Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  130. Wolfe C (2001) Being worthy of trust: a response to Joseph Raz. In: George R (ed) Natural law, liberalism, and morality: contemporary essays. Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  131. Woods N (1999) Good governance in international organizations. Glob Gov 5(1):39Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. Eljalill Tauschinsky
    • 1
  1. 1.WalldorfGermany

Personalised recommendations