Contestation and co-optation: why secrecy in EU external relations varies

Rosén, Guri

doi:10.1080/01402382.2017.1413217

Cited by 8 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…At the outset of the talks, national parliamentarians had great difficulties accessing the necessary documents to monitor the TTIP negotiations. The EP, by contrast, was highly successful in pushing for access to confidential documents for all MEPs (Rosén, 2018). Thus, in contrast to EP elections, or policy debates where the EP plays a more marginal role, one could argue that TTIP was a good occasion for MEPs to demonstrate their importance without too much competition.…”

Section: Engagementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Proving Their Worth? The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership and the Members of the European Parliament

Rosén

2019

PaG

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent trade negotiations in the EU have provoked unprecedented levels of controversy, in particular the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) between the EU and the US. One crucial channel for public contestation is the European Parliament (EP) which, following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, has to give consent to international agreements. Thus, this article sets out to answer the question: During the dispute over TTIP, did members of the EP (MEPs) engage in the public debate, and if so, how? If they engage in debates, what characterises their engagement: Do they engage with voter concerns, do they engage in a responsive manner, and do they contribute to politicisation as quite a few feared? Building on an analysis of newspaper coverage and plenary debates in the EP, the article shows that many supporters of TTIP attempted to de-politicise the debate, while opponents most frequently evoked ‘the voice of the people’ to politicise TTIP. Thus, MEPs do not only respond to politicisation, they also attempt to make politicisation happen by evoking public concerns. The article highlights the multifaceted relationship between responsiveness and politicisation, where claims responding to voter concerns, are used both to incite contestation and alleviate it.

show abstract

Section: Engagementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Proving Their Worth? The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership and the Members of the European Parliament

Rosén

2019

PaG

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Public transparency, in turn, focuses on the relationship between external stakeholders, or 'the public,' on the one hand and each of the EU institutions (EP, Council and Commission) on the other hand. Such an actor-based distinction is also proposed by Rosén (2018), who focuses on the interactions between the executive and public on the one hand and the executive and EP on the other hand.…”

Section: Framework For Comprehensive Assessment Of Transparency In Trmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transparency in EU Trade Policy: A Comprehensive Assessment of Current Achievements

Marx

Loo²

2021

PaG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

<p>The EU trade policy is increasingly confronted with demands for more transparency. This article aims to investigate how transparency takes shape in EU trade policy. First, we operationalize the concept of transparency along two dimensions: a process dimension and an actor dimension. We then apply this framework to analysis of EU Free Trade Agreements (FTAs). After analyzing transparency in relation to FTAs from the perspective of the institutional actors (Commission, Council and Parliament), the different instruments and policies that grant the public actors (civil society and citizens) access to information and documents about EU FTAs are explored by discussing Regulation 1049/2001, which provides for public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents, and the role of the European Ombudsman. The article is based on an analysis of official documents, assessments in the academic literature and case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union. The ultimate aim is to assess current initiatives and identify relevant gaps in the EU’s transparency policies. This article argues that the EU has made significant progress in fostering transparency in the negotiation phase of FTAs, but less in the implementation phase.</p>

show abstract

“…First, secrecy has expanded considerably, reaching beyond its traditional domain of internal and external security. While some contributions in this collection explore how secrecy in the EU's multi-level system plays out in its 'traditional' settings of internal security (Aden 2018), as well as external security (Cross 2018;Rosén 2018), other papers examine how secrecy affects economic and monetary policy making (see Gandrud and Hallerberg 2018;Kreuder-Sonnen 2018;Rosén 2018). Second, the contributions highlight the challenges posed by the construction of secrecy architectures beyond the state.…”

Section: Externalities Of International Co-operationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, even the European Parliament, a champion when it comes to demanding access to information, has seen its attempts to gain access to sensitive information in the area of foreign and security policy largely thwarted (see Rosén and Stie 2017). Rosén (2018) shows that the parliament's struggle to gain access to documents is not merely the consequence of the intergovernmental decision-making structure governing foreign policy making in the EU; it also has to do with the normative compliance pull of the 'right to secrecy' . She shows that 'keeping a secret' in the realm of security policy is considered more legitimate than in the area of trade.…”

Section: Institutional Perspective: the Contested Legitimacy Of Secrementioning

confidence: 99%

Secrecy in Europe

Rittberger

Goetz

2018

West European Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article introduces a collection of papers devoted to the study of secrecy in European politics across a range of EU and national settings and policy domains. Academic interest in secret politics-those aspects of public activity intentionally concealed from the public eye-and the governance of secrecy-the political processes and regulatory frameworks governing secret keeping-is growing. This interest reflects technological, social and political developments that appear to signal the end of privacy and the rapid expansion of political secrecy in European multi-level settings. As a consequence, the tensions between democratic accountability, with its transparency requirements, and political secrecy, which is typically justified on grounds of effectiveness of state action, have become more marked and more politicised. Engaging with these developments, the contributions to this collection draw on actor-and interest-centred perspectives that focus on actors' motivations in secret politics; institutional perspectives that focus on contestation over secrecy norms; and organisational perspectives that emphasise the diversity of secrecy cultures. Further research will benefit from paying special attention to a diverse range of inter-institutional and interorganisational secrecy settings; to political contestation over secrecy and the regulatory regimes that govern it; and to the refashioning of public-private secrecy architectures. KEYWORDS secrecy; transparency; privacy; european union; european politics Arguments about the justification of, and limits to, secrecy pervade European politics at both national and EU levels. For example, despite pressure by the EU on its member states to enhance transparency in the banking sector in the wake of the euro crisis, the German government and parliament are reluctant to release supervisory data relating to Germany's banks to the public (Gandrud and Hallerberg 2018). Although the European Parliament has achieved advances towards further transparency of decision making in the Council, it has largely fallen short of restricting EU governments' secrecy privileges in the Common Foreign and Security Policy (Rosén 2018). In the 'fight' against terrorism, governments have introduced targeted sanctions CONTACT Berthold rittberger

show abstract

Contestation and co-optation: why secrecy in EU external relations varies

Cited by 8 publications

References 42 publications

Proving Their Worth? The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership and the Members of the European Parliament

Proving Their Worth? The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership and the Members of the European Parliament

Transparency in EU Trade Policy: A Comprehensive Assessment of Current Achievements

Secrecy in Europe

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About