Essay The Corruption Scandal of the European Commission

Political corruption is a major problem in the US today. It involves almost all levels of government and affects people from all walks of life. Public office is a noble post and citizens put their trust in government officials to carry out their constitutional duties for the benefit of the citizenry. The problem comes in where both elected and unelected officials perform their duties with the goal of personal gain in full view of the law. The ethical and moral wrongs of corruption are unjustifiable in any context.

Someone who is abusing the power that is given to him or her defines corruption, however, the word in its self is more than a simple idea; it is an intricate network. Since people’s views about ethical and moral behavior affect the way corruption is examined, the word has a slightly different meaning to each person. Additionally, misconduct across various societies is viewed differently due to social and cultural borders. The criminal justice system has had many instances where corruption had affected the outcome of a case and has inserted itself into the legal process.

The council of ministers- This is the European Union’s main decision making body, it is composed of ministers from the National governments of each of the member states, and meets in Brussels or Luxembourg to agree legislation and policy.

Further, the Commission’s institutional structure is a factor putting great weight on perceptions of the democratic deficit since it lacks democratic credentials yet largely dominates EU law-making in spite of the presence of the EP as its democratic face. Commissioners are not elected, directly nor indirectly, as is with most sovereign executives. Follesdal and Hix however argue that the exercise of these executive powers requires contestation of political leadership and policy. They also suggest that direct elections by citizens or national parliaments should be allowed for the contestation of the Commission President who holds the most powerful EU executive position, so as to increase democratic input. Contrary to this position is that of Moravcsik, who discounts the idea of elections as a possible remedy and rejects the notion of

Firstly, there is democratic deficit as the Commission is not democratically elected but appointed by the Member States’ governments and it has the monopoly of initiating laws. It may alter its proposal during law-making process as long as the council has not amended the proposal. However, EU citizens do not elect this powerful body and thus it lacks legitimacy as it is much too powerful for an institution that is not democratically representative of the EU citizens. It is only accountable to the European Parliament and the Council. It can be argued that the Commission does not represent the interest of the EU as a

     After the tragedies of World War II, European leaders have made striving efforts to prevent such a catastrophic event from occurring on their continent again. The best solution seemed to be highly mechanized cooperation among the highest European powers to assure that future conflict, and perhaps war, could not arise between them. If all the states ran themselves in a manner cooperating with their neighbors, conflict could be avoided. To prevent other nations from not cooperating, treaties and institutions would have to be designed for each area of international interest such as trade, communications, security, and so forth. As the century progressed, more organizations, institutions and associations were

It would be convenient to start this research paper by stating that corruption is a challenge mainly for businesses in developing countries and that it is unrelated to the current affliction of the economy in the United States. It would also be convenient to claim corruption has declined in America as a result of awareness raising campaigns and the numerous anti-corruption laws. But none of those aforementioned statements would be true. Corruption is not the exception, but rather the rule in today’s business practices. In 2004, Daniel Kaufmann, a senior fellow at Brookings Institution and former director at the World Bank, calculated an index of "legally corrupt" manifestations which is defined as the extent of undue influence

As regards to international treaties, it has the main role to decide on whether to give the Commission a mandate to negotiate, the content decision to mandate, overseeing the negotiations in a special committee, and then decide on the content to sign and conclude the agreement. However, it cannot be forgotten that the EP’s power to consent on most treaties and the Commission’s power of negotiation. The Council also has power to stop such treaties and to define the EU’s position instead of implementing them. It is clear that the Council represents the interests of the governments of the Member State on resolving issues of conflict and it plays an important role in the development of

In looking at international efforts in preventing corruption, there is a similar situation where not all corruption is deemed “against the law”, where corruption may go unnoticed because of the lack of effort taken in preventing it. Antonio Argandoña, a professor emeritus of Economics and Business Ethics, examines the UN’s Convention Against Corruption, pointing out that there was no “obligation to make [small-time corruption] in the private sector a criminal offence”, especially when “the line between private and public sector is blurred”, as in many countries (490). Interestingly, Wolfgang Hetzer, general of the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF), claims that this “silent corruption” is no longer the case, stating that “It is no longer correct to say that corrupt practices are gradually

The European Union is an entity that is seen nowhere else in the world. It is not a government, it is not an international organization, and it is not just an association of states. The European Union members, instead, have decided to turnover part of their sovereignty to the Union so that many decisions can be made at the institutions leadership level. This partnership includes 28 diverse democracies built together on the basis of complex treaties. Although the goals of this organization were to assist with expanding economic prosperity, peace and stability throughout its member states, the European Union has been faced with ever-pressing concerns in the recent past that are very serious and may in fact become fatal to the continued coalescing between members. These problems can be categorized into three categories; economic, social, and political.

The only institutions that are permitted to perform the tasks entrusted to the European Community are A European Parliament, a Council, a Commission, a Court of Justice and a Court of Auditors.1 In the Parliament members took seats not by nation, but by party affiliation. They had limited legislative authority but they supervised the European Commission and the budget. The Parliament also kept the idea of unity alive. Unity was the main reason that all of these communities were formed in the first place. The final decisions rested with the Council of Ministers representing each of the member countries. Their decisions on very important matters had to be unanimous. Another important aspect of the Community was the Court of Justice, it gave the whole Community a sense of federalism.1

Political corruption has existed throughout the ages. It believed to be most prominent in positions of power, because of the role money plays in getting people power. However, over the centuries, corruption has changed so much so as to not match a particular definition of corruption, perpetually growing deceptively harder to find (Ebbe).

Does the Commission have “a vocation to further the interest of the Community as a whole?” I believe it does, by looking at its responsibilities in the Union itself proves this. And if you look at the statement made by the Court of Justice where it says that “Commissioners are required to ensure that the general interest of the European Union precedes at all times over national and personal interest”. In which I understand that a Commissions’ work should be emphasized on the whole Community (EU) instead of just one State Member.

According to Joos (2015), the Lisbon Treaty also known as the reform treaty which was made on 1st December 2009 has resulted in complex political decision-making process in EU. First, it strengthens the role of the parliament in political decision making and increased the number of decision makers. Second, decision making in the Council is now made through the qualified majority principle rather than the unanimity principle.

The European Commission is the Executive (governmental) body of the EU, initiating legislative proposals and also managing the EU’s budget (Europa, 2007). Each commission operates for a five-year period, with meetings taking place in Brussels every Wednesday. The Commission consists of a President of the Commission and twenty-eight commissioners (some vice presidents). Employees of the Commission are organised according to department (Directorates-General) and answer to a Commissioner. The Commission exists in order to represent the interests of the whole of the EU (thus arguably the whole of Europe), as opposed to individual Member States. The Commission represents the EU on a global basis and is the main participant in negotiations in areas such as trade. The appointment of Commissioners is the responsibility of the Parliament, with all having previously assumed senior positions in politics in their own country, usually within its national government. Proposals are drafted by the senior civil servant (Director-General. A proposal may be adopted if more than half of the Commissioners decide to adopt it. Once agreed, all Commissioners must give their unconditional support – similar to the collective responsibility held by the Scottish executives and the UK. The Commission works closely with both