Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Functional and normative delegation to non-majoritarian institutions: The case of the European Competition Network

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Comparative European Politics Aims and scope

Abstract

There is a normative and a functional dimension to delegation to non-majoritarian institutions. These dimensions are explored in this paper and considered in the context of the recent modernization of European Community (EC) competition law enforcement. The principal – agent model provides insights into how and why Member States delegate extensive enforcement powers to the EC Commission and the National Competition Authorities, but as it offers primarily a functional analysis the normative issues of control, accountability and legitimacy cannot be fully encapsulated within it. Thus, an analysis of the EC competition law regime requires consideration of both dimensions using the twin-track approach of principal – agent analysis and a rule of law analysis in order to understand how public power is and should be exercised within it.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Regulation 17/63 [1959–62] OJ Sp. Ed. p. 87.

  2. Regulation 19/65 [1965–66] OJ Sp. Ed. p. 35.

  3. Regulation 2790/99 on the application of Article 81(3) of the Treaty to categories of vertical agreements and concerted practices [1999] OJ L 336/21, 29.12.1999.

  4. Regulation 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the implementation of the rules on competition laid down in Articles 81 and 82 of the EC Treaty [2003] OJ L 1/1.

  5. Article 11(3) and (4) Regulation 1.

  6. Article 11(6) Regulation 1 and recital 17.

  7. Article 11(1) Regulation 1.

  8. Regulation 139/2004 of 20 January 2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings [2004] OJ L 24/1.

  9. 56/65 Société Technique Minière v. Maschinenbau Ulm [1966] ECR 235 at 249.

  10. Article 3 Regulation 1.

  11. Recital 18, Regulation 1.

  12. See discussion in cases T‐339/04 France Télécom vs Commission [2007] ECR II-52/especially para 83, 84 and T-340/04 France Télécom vs Commission [2007] ECR II-573.

  13. Article 35 Regulation 1.

  14. Article 11 Regulation 1.

  15. EC Commission website, http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/ecn/statistics.html.

  16. Article 12, recital 16, Regulation 1.

References

  • American Bar Association Section on Antitrust Law Brown Bag Program (ABA). (2005) The European Competition Network: What It Is and Where It's Going, 19 April, available from the author.

  • Audretsch, D.B., Baumol, W.J. and Burke, A.E. (2001) Competition policy in dynamic markets. International Journal of Industrial Organization 19 (5): 613–634.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker, J.B. (2003) The case for antitrust enforcement. Journal of Economic Perspectives 17 (4): 27–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bloom, M. (2005) Exchange of confidential information among members of the EU network of competition authorities: Possible consequences of a relatively broad scope for exchange of confidential information on national procedural law and antitrust. In: C.-D. Ehlermann and I. Atanasiu (eds.) European Competition Law Annual 2002: Constructing the EU Network of Competition Authorities. Oxford: Hart Publishing, pp. 389–404.

    Google Scholar 

  • Böge, U. (2005) The commission's position within the network: The perspective of the NCAs’ sanctions. In: C.-D. Ehlermann and I. Atanasiu (eds.) European Competition Law Annual 2002: Constructing the EU Network of Competition Authorities. Oxford: Hart Publishing, pp. 247–254.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bovens, M. (2007) Analysing and assessing accountability: A conceptual framework. European Law Journal 13 (4): 447–468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brammer, S. (2005) Concurrent jurisdiction under Regulation 1/2003 and the issue of case allocation. Common Market Law Review 42 (5): 1383–1424.

    Google Scholar 

  • Budzinski, O. (2008) Monoculture versus diversity in competition economics. Cambridge Journal of Economics 32 (2): 295–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cini, M. and McGowan, L. (1998) Competition Policy in the European Union. Basingstoke: Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Crandall, R.W. and Winston, C. (2003) Does antitrust policy improve consumer welfare? Assessing the evidence. Journal of Economic Perspectives 17 (4): 3–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dekeyser, K. and De Smijter, E. (2005) The exchange of evidence within the ECN and how it contributes to the European co-operation and co-ordination in Cartel Cases. Legal Issue of Economic Itegration 32 (2): 161–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dicey, A.V. (1914) Lectures on the Relation between Law and Public Opinion in England in the Nineteenth Century, 2nd edn. London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dicey, A.V. (1964) Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution, 10th edn. London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drahos, M. (2001) Convergence of Competition Laws in the European Community. The Hague: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • EC Commission. (1999) White Paper on the Modernisation of the Rules Implementing Articles 85 and 86 of the EC Treaty, Commission Programme 99/027 OJ C 132, 12 May 1999.

  • EC Commission. (2004) Notice on Cooperation Within the Network of Competition Authorities [2004] OJ C101/43.

  • EC Commission. (2005) Annual Report on Competition Policy, http://ec.europa.eu/comm/compe tition/annual_reports/2005/en.pdf.

  • EC Commission. (2006) Annual Report on Competition Policy, http://ec.europa.eu/comm/compe tition/annual_reports/2006/en.pdf.

  • EC Commission. (2007) Annual Report on Competition Policy, http://ec.europa.eu/comm/compe tition/annual_reports/2007/en.pdf.

  • Egan, M. (1998) Regulatory strategies, delegation and European market integration. Journal of European Public Policy 5 (3): 485–506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehlermann, C.-D. (1995) Reflections on the European Cartel Office. Common Market Law Review 32: 471–486.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehlermann, C.-D. (2000) The modernisation of EC antitrust policy. A legal and cultural revolution. Common Market Law Review 37: 537–590.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Competition Network. (2006) EC Model Leniency Programme, September, http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/ecn/model_leniency_en.pdf.

  • European Council and EC Commission. (2002) Joint Statement of the Council and the Commission on the Functioning of the Network of Competition Authorities, Interinstitutional File 2000/0243 (CNS), 10 December 2002, Brussels.

  • Frazer, T. (1992) Monopoly, Competition and the law. 2nd edn. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuller, L. (1964) The Morality of Law. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerber, D.J. (1994) Constitutionalising the economy: German neo-liberalism, competition law and the “New” Europe. American Journal of Comparative Law 42 (1): 25–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goyder, D.G. (2003) EC Competition Law, 4th edn. Oxford: OUP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grant, G. and Neven, D.J. (2005) The attempted merger between general electric and Honeywell: A case study of transatlantic conflict. Journal of Competition Law and Economics 1 (3): 595–633.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harlow, C. (2002) Accountability in the European Union. Oxford: OUP.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hayek, F.A. (1944) The Road to Serfdom. Routledge Classics 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayek, F.A. (1960) The Constitution of Liberty. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hood, C. (1986) The Hidden Public Sector: The Quangocratization of the World. In: F.-X. Kaufmann, G. Majone and V. Ostrom (eds.) Guidance, Control and Evaluation in the Public Sector. Berlin: de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hood, C., James, O., Peters, B.G. and Scott, C. (2004) Controlling Modern Government. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, T. (2001) Regulation 17: The impact of the current application of articles 81 and 82 by national competition authorities in the European Commission's proposals for reform. European Competition Law Review 22 (10): 405–415.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kassim, H. and Menon, A. (2003) The principal‐agent approach and the study of the EU: Promist unfulfilled? Journal of European Public Policy 10 (1): 121–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lacey, N. (1992) The jurisprudence of discretion: Escaping the legal paradigm. In: K. Hawkins (ed.) The Use of Discretion. Oxford: OUP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laudati, L. (1996) The European Commission as Regulator: The uncertain pursuit of the competitive market. In: G. Majone (ed.) Regulating Europe. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehmkuhl, D. (2008) On government, governance and judicial review: The case of European competition policy. Journal of Public Policy 28 (1): 139–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maher, I. (1996) Alignment of Competition Laws in the EC. Yearbook of European Law, 16: 223–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maher, I. (1999) Competition law and intellectual property rights: Evolving formalism. In: P. Craig and G. de Búrca (eds.) The Evolution of EU Law. Oxford: OUP, pp. 597–624.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maher, I. (2004) Regulating competition. In: C. Parker, J. Braithwaite, C. Scott and N. Lacey (eds.) Regulating Law. Oxford: OUP, pp. 187–206.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Maher, I. (2005) Networking competition authorities in the European Union: Diversity and change. In: C.-D. Ehlermann and I. Atanasiu (eds.) European Competition Law Annual 2002: Constructing the EU Network of Competition Authorities. Oxford: Hart Publishing, pp. 223–236.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maher, I. (2007) Economic governance: Hybridity, accountability, and control. Columbia Journal of European Law 13 (3): 679–703.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maher, I. (2008) Regulation and modes of governance in EC Competition Law: What's new in enforcement? Fordham International Law Journal 31 (6): 1713–1740.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marmor, A. (2004) The rule of law and its limits. Law and Philosophy: 23: 1–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mashaw, J.L. (2005) Structuring a “dense complexity”: Accountability and the project of administrative law. Issues in Legal Scholarship, http://www.bepress.com/ils/iss6/art4/.

  • McCubbins, M.D. and Schwartz, T. (1984) Congressional oversight overlooked: Police patrols versus fire alarms. American Journal of Political Science 28: 165–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCubbins, M.D., Noll, R.G. and Weingast, B.R. (1987) Administrative procedures as instruments of political control of law. Journal of Law, Economics and Organization 3 (2): 243–277.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCubbins, M.D., Noll, R.G. and Weingast, B.R. (1989) Structure and process, politics and policy: Administrative arrangements and the political control of law of agencies. Virginia Law Review 75: 431–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGowan, L. and Wilks, S. (1995) The first supranational policy in the European Union: Competition policy. European Journal of Political Research 28 (2): 141–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mulgan, R. (2000) Accountability: An ever-expanding concept. Public Administration 78: 555–573.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Audit Office (NAO). (2005) The Office of Fair Trading: Enforcing Competition in Markets Report by the Comptroller and Auditor General, HC 593 session 2005–06, 17 November.

  • O’Donnell, G . (2004) Why the rule of law matters. Journal of Democracy 15 (4): 32–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, D. (1991) Government in the United Kingdom: The Search for Accountability, Effectiveness and Citizenship. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollack, M.A. (1997) Delegation, agency, and agenda setting in the European community. International Organization 51 (1): 99–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reichelt, D. (2005) To what extent does the co-operation within the European Competition Network protect the rights of undertakings? Common Market Law Review 42: 745–782.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riley, A. (2003) EC antitrust modernisation: The commission does very nicely – thank you part II: Between the idea and the reality: Decentralisation under Regulation 1. European Competition Law Review 24 (12): 657–672.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose, J. (2004) The rule of law in the western world: An overview. Journal of Social Philosophy 35 (4): 457–470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, E.L. (1990–1991) The new public law: The concept of law and the new public law scholarship. Michigan Law Review 89 (4): 792–836.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott, C. (2000) Accountability in the regulatory state. Journal of Legal Studies 27 (1): 38–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slaughter, A.M. (2004) A New World Order: Government Networks and the Disaggregated State. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smits, R. (2005) The European competition network: Selected aspects. Legal Issues of Economic Integration 32 (2): 175–192.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tamanaha, B.Z. (2004) On the Rule of Law: History, Politics, Theory. Cambridge: CUP.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Thatcher, M. and Stone Sweet, A. (2002) The theory and practice of delegation to non-majoritarian institutions. West European Politics 25 (1): 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T.R. and Huo, Y.J. (2002) Trust in the Law: Encouraging Public Cooperation with the Police and Courts. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Unger, R. (1976) Law in Modern Society. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Waarden, F. and Drahos, M. (2002) Courts and (epistemic) communities in the convergence of competition policies. Journal of European Public Policy 9 (6): 913–934.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wenzel, M. (2002) The impact of outcome orientation and justice concerns on tax compliance: The role of taxpayers’ identity. Journal of Applied Psychology 87: 629–645.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilks, S. (2005) Agency escape: Decentralization or dominance of the European Commission in the modernization of competition policy? Governance 18 (3): 431–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilks, S. (2007) Agencies, networks, discourses and the trajectory of European competition enforcement. European Competition Journal 3 (2): 437–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilks, S. and Bartle, I. (2002) The unanticipated consequences of creating independent competition agencies. West European Politics 25 (1): 148–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilks, S. and McGowan, L. (1996) Competition policy in the European Union: Creating a federal agency? In: G.B. Doern and S. Wilks (eds.) Comparative Competition Policy. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yeung, K. (2004) Securing Compliance: A Principled Approach. Oxford: Hart Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

I thank David Coen, Dermot Hodson, Hussein Kassim, Suzanne Kingston, Colin Scott and an anonymous referee for valuable comments. Earlier versions of this paper were presented at the UACES 36th Annual Conference, Limerick, 1 September 2006; the Workshop ‘European Economic Governance: Communication, Credibility, Legitimacy, Accountability’ Chatham House and John Hopkins University, Bologna, 3 December 2005; Credibility through Delegation? Independent Agencies in Comparative Perspective, ESRC Centre for Competition Policy, University of East Anglia, 29 June 2005. I also thank the participants for comments and discussion. This article is a much revised and updated version of the working paper ‘The Rule of Law and Agency: The Case of Competition Policy’, Chatham House IEPWP 06/01, March 2006, see http://www.chathamhouse.org.uk/viewdocument.php?documentid=7453.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Law and Dublin European Institute, University College Dublin, Roebuck Castle, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland

    Imelda Maher

Authors
  1. Imelda Maher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Maher, I. Functional and normative delegation to non-majoritarian institutions: The case of the European Competition Network. Comp Eur Polit 7, 414–434 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1057/cep.2008.44

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/cep.2008.44

Keywords

Search

Navigation