TY - JOUR
T1 - The Elusive Legitimacy of EU Soft Law
T2 - An Analysis of Consultation and Participation in the Process of Adopting COVID-19 Soft Law in the EU
AU - Eliantonio, Mariolina
AU - Stefan, Oana
PY - 2021/3
Y1 - 2021/3
N2 - This article takes issue with the legitimacy of EU soft law instruments issued to deal with the COVID-19 crisis. Up to August 2020, we identified a total of 197 such instruments, and analysed the procedures for their adoption. We found little evidence of Parliamentary involvement or stakeholder consultation, with COVID-19 soft law replicating decision-making patterns which have been constantly criticised in the literature as illegitimate and opaque. Giving due consideration to the exceptional nature of these measures, the article suggests some quick fixes which might increase, ex post factum, the legitimacy of these instruments.
AB - This article takes issue with the legitimacy of EU soft law instruments issued to deal with the COVID-19 crisis. Up to August 2020, we identified a total of 197 such instruments, and analysed the procedures for their adoption. We found little evidence of Parliamentary involvement or stakeholder consultation, with COVID-19 soft law replicating decision-making patterns which have been constantly criticised in the literature as illegitimate and opaque. Giving due consideration to the exceptional nature of these measures, the article suggests some quick fixes which might increase, ex post factum, the legitimacy of these instruments.
KW - soft law
KW - legitimacy
KW - COVID-19
KW - public consultations
KW - European Union (EU)
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85104304319&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1017/err.2020.119
DO - 10.1017/err.2020.119
M3 - Article
SN - 1867-299X
VL - 12
SP - 159
EP - 175
JO - European Journal of Risk Regulation
JF - European Journal of Risk Regulation
IS - 1
ER -