Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T09:59:05.542Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Institutional Performance and Compliance with EU Law: Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovakia and Slovenia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 February 2010

Gerda Falkner
Gerda Falkner
Affiliation:
Institute for European Integration Research, Austrian Academy of Sciences, Strohgasse 45/DG, 1030 Vienna, Tel.: +43 1 51581 7555 / 7565, email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article compares the performance of state institutions and compliance with EU law in the Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovakia and Slovenia. The public institutions highlighted are of crucial relevance when it comes to enforcing EU social standards and include the court and legal systems as well as labour inspectorates and equal treatment authorities. Expert and practitioner assessments point to major shortcomings in their institutional performance. The procedural compliance pattern to which these shortcomings give rise closely resembles that found by previous studies in some Western European countries, notably Ireland and Italy. Thus, the four countries examined here fall within a ‘world of dead letters’ as far as their compliance with EU law is concerned. In this ‘world’, EU directives tend to be transposed in a politicised mode (although so far, this happened rather timely and correctly) and there is frequent non-compliance at the later stages of monitoring and enforcement.

Keywords

complianceEU lawenforcementstateEast Central Europe
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Public Policy , Volume 30 , Special Issue 1: Performing to Type? Institutional Performance in New EU Member States , April 2010 , pp. 101 - 116
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, J., Bernstein, D. and Gray, C. (2005) ‘Judicial Systems in Transition Economies – Assessing the Past, Looking to the Future’ (Washington: The World Bank).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Austrian Federal Economic Chamber (2006) Entschädigungen bei zu langen Gerichtsverfahren (http://portal.wko.at/wk/sn_detail.wk?AngID=1&DocID=526858&StID=254282).Google Scholar
Barancová, H. (2006) ‘EU Adhesion of the Slovak Republic and the Development of Employment Legislation’, Transition Studies Review 13, 1: 9–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Causse, Emmanuelle (2008) ‘Hungary’, in Falkner, G., Treib, O. and Holzleithner, E. (eds.) Compliance in the Enlarged European Union: Living Rights or Dead Letters? Aldershot et al.: Ashgate, 61–92.Google Scholar
Dimitrova, A. and Toshkov, D. (2007) ‘The Dynamics of Domestic Coordination of EU Policy in the New Member States: Impossible to Lock In?’ West European Politics 30, 5: 961–986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
European Commission (2002) ‘Regular Report on Slovenia's Preparation for EU Accession’ (Brussels: European Commission). (http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/archives/pdf/key_documents/2002/sl_en.pdf).Google Scholar
European Commission (2004) Enlargement Archives: Relations with Slovenia. (http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/archives/enlargement_process/past_enlargements/eu10/slovenia_en.htm).Google Scholar
European Commission (2008) Eurobarometer 69: Public Opinion in The European Union, Brussels. (http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/standard_en.htm).Google Scholar
Falkner, G., Hartlapp, M. and Treib, O. (2007) ‘Worlds of compliance: Why leading approaches to the implementation of EU legislation are only “sometimes-true theories”’, European Journal of Political Research 64, 3: 395–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falkner, G. and Treib, O. (2008) ‘Three Worlds of Compliance or Four? The EU15 Compared to New Member States’, Journal of Common Market Studies 46, 2: 293–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falkner, G., Treib, O., Hartlapp, M. and Leiber, S. (2005) Complying with Europe. EU Harmonisation and Soft Law in the Member States, Cambridge/UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falkner, G., Treib, O. and Holzleithner, E. (in cooperation with Causse, E., Furtlehner, P., Schulze, M., Wiedermann, C.) (2008) Compliance in the Enlarged European Union: Living Rights or Dead Letters?, Aldershot et al.: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Fialová, Z. (2005) ‘Human Rights’, in Meseznikov, G. and Kollar, M. (eds.) Slovakia 2004: A Global Report on the State of Society, Bratislava: Institute for Public Affairs, 149–166.Google Scholar
Furtlehner, P. (2008) ‘Slovenia’, in Falkner, G., Treib, O. and Holzleithner, E. (eds.) Compliance in the Enlarged European Union: Living Rights or Dead Letters? Aldershot et al.: Ashgate, 125–156.Google Scholar
Hartlapp, M. (2005) Die Kontrolle der nationalen Rechtsdurchsetzung durch die Europäische Kommission, Frankfurt/M.: Campus.Google Scholar
Hartlapp, M. (2007) ‘On Enforcement, Management and Persuasion: Different Logics of Implementation Policy in the EU and the ILO’, Journal of Common Market Studies 45, 3: 653–674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hartlapp, M. and Falkner, G. (2009) ‘Problems of Operationalization and Data in EU Compliance Research’, European Union Politics 10, 2: 281–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kanjuo Mrcela, A. (2004) Thematic feature – individual labour/employment disputes and the courts. EIROnline Document SI0403204T. Dublin, European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions. (http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/eiro/2004/03/tfeature/si0403204t.htm).Google Scholar
Krizsan, A. (2009): From Formal Adoption to Enforcement: Post-Accession Shifts in EU Impact on Hungary in the Equality Policy Field. In Schimmelfennig, F. and Trauner, F. (eds.): Post-Accession Compliance in the EU’s New Member States, European Integration Online Papers, Special Issue 2, Vol. 13.Google Scholar
Kühn, Z. (2005) ‘The Application of European Law in the New Member States: Several (Early) Predictions’, German Law Journal 6, 3: 563–582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leiber, S. (2005) Europäische Sozialpolitik und nationale Sozialpartnerschaft, Frankfurt/M.: Campus.Google Scholar
Matczak, M., Bencze, M., Kühn, Z. (2010) ‘Constitutions, EU Law and Judicial Strategies in the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland’. Journal of Public Policy 30(1).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mucha, J., Rakovsky, J., Krepelka, F., Passer, J., Rakovsky, J., Krepelka, F. and Passer, J. (2005) 1 Jahr EU Mitgliedschaft: Erste Bilanz aus der Sicht der tschechischen Höchstgerichte. EIF Working Paper No. 17. Wien, Institut für Europäische Integrationsforschung (http://www.eif.oeaw.ac.at/downloads/workingpapers/wp18.pdf).Google Scholar
Open Society Institute (2002) ‘Monitoring the EU Accession Process: Judicial Capacity’ (Budapest: EU Accession Monitoring Program). (http://www.eumap.org/topics/judicial/reports/judicial02).Google Scholar
Schulze, M. (2008) ‘Slovakia’, in Falkner, G., Treib, O. and Holzleithner, E. (eds.) Compliance in the Enlarged European Union: Living Rights or Dead Letters? Aldershot et al.: Ashgate, 93–123.Google Scholar
Sedelmeier, U. (2006) ‘Europeanisation in new member and candidate states’, Living Reviews in European Governance 1, 3: 1–34. (http://www.livingreviews.org/lreg-2006-3).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sedelmeier, U. (2008) ‘After conditionality: post-accession compliance with EU law in East Central Europe’, Journal of European Public Policy 15, 6: 806–825.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tóth, A., Nacsa, B. and Neumann, L. (2004) Thematic feature – individual labour/employment disputes and the courts. EIROnline Document HU0403101T. Dublin, European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions. (http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/eiro/2004/03/tfeature/hu0403101t.htm.Google Scholar
Treib, O. (2003) ‘Die Umsetzung von EU-Richtlinien im Zeichen der Parteipolitik: Eine akteurzentrierte Antwort auf die Misfit-These’, Politische Vierteljahresschrift 44, 4: 506–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Treib, O. (2004) Die Bedeutung der nationalen Parteipolitik für die Umsetzung europäischer Sozialrichtlinien, Frankfurt/M.: Campus.Google Scholar
Treib, O. (2008) ‘Implementing and Complying with EU Governance Outputs’, Living Reviews in european governance 3, 5: 1–30 (http://www.livingreviews.org/lreg-2008-5).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vajda, R. (2006) ‘The Perception of Mobbing and Related Services in Hungary: Report for Daphne Project Mobbing II’ (Budapest: Mona Foundation Hungary). (http://www.surrey.ac.uk/politics/cse/Report_MONA.pdf).Google Scholar
Wiedermann, C. (2008) ‘Czech Republic’, in Falkner, G., Treib, O. and Holzleithner, E. (eds.) Compliance in the Enlarged European Union: Living Rights or Dead Letters?, Aldershot et al.: Ashgate, 27–59.Google Scholar
Zubek, R. (2008) Core Executive and Europeanization in Central Europe, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zubek, R. and Goetz, K. H. (2010) ‘Performing to Type? How State Institutions Matter in East Central Europe’. Journal of Public Policy 30(1).CrossRefGoogle Scholar