EU Governance in an Area of Freedom, Security and Justice: Logics of Decision-making in the Justice and Home Affairs Council

This paper specifies the scope conditions of the logics of appropriateness and consequentiality in the JHA Council.

ARENA Working Paper 15/2007 (pdf)

Jonathan P. Aus

This collection of articles examines some of the legislative cornerstones of the emerging EU Area of Freedom, Security and Justice in light of the research question whether the relevant decision-making processes in the Justice and Home Affairs Council may best be understood from a Rationalist or from an Institutionalist perspective. The empirical focus lies on a handful of important legislative acts adopted by the Justice and Home Affairs Council after the entry into force of the Treaty of Amsterdam, namely the Dublin II Regulation, the Eurodac Regulation, the Biometric Passports Regulation and the cross-pillar Facilitators Package. Based on a comparative analysis of these case studies, the author specifies the conditions under which the members of the Justice and Home Affairs Council adhered to the logic of consequentiality, the logic of appropriateness, or both.

Tags: game theory, policy analysis, cross-border crime, immigration policy, passport policy, police cooperation, Schengen agreement, security/internal, joint decision making, Council of Ministers, political science, governance, institutionalism, methodological issues, national interest, acquis communautaire, free movement, asylum policy, new technologies, police co-operation, Schengen, access to documents
Published Nov. 9, 2010 10:52 AM