Brussels, 07/01/2003 (Agence Europe) - Romania is supporting the European Commission's proposals, "in its position as an independent institution that ensures equality between current and new Member States, as well as between rich and poor, North and South and which embodies coherency, transparency, high quality expertise and regard for the common interest". These are the words of the Romanian representative to the European Convention, Hildegard Puwak and her alternate, Constantin Ene, in a contribution presented in December in support of the European Commission's communication on EU institutional architecture submitted to the European Convention at the beginning of December (see EUROPE 6 December p 3 and Europe/Documents N.2305/2306 7 December 2002). The two Convention Members approved the idea of giving the European Commission the right to make formal proposals instead of simple recommendations in the field of economic policy co-ordination, as well as that of merging the functions of the CFSP High Representative and the Commissioner for External Relations and the "dual legitimacy" of the European Commission (not only with respect to the European Parliament but also the European Council).
This last proposal has shocked John Temple Lang the most (Lecturer at Trinity College Dublin), who describes it in comments he addressed to the European Commission as a "serious mistake" given that it would destroy the Commission's independence. Mr Temple Lang warns that the facility to sack the Commission would therefore be in the hands of those who also have the facility to appoint a replacement Commission. He believes that it is "simply naïve" to believe that this will help to strengthen the Commission, whereas the Council is its "main rival" in the quest for power and influence in the EU. Mr Temple Lang also sees another threat to the independence of the European Commission in the proposal to elect the Commission President by a two-thirds majority at the European Parliament.
This would mean that the candidates for the Commission Presidency would want to make themselves acceptable to this majority and would probably neglect the interests of the minority, warns Mr Temple Lang, who deduces that this would make the Commission President a political appointment and not a politically neutral post. Mr Temple Lang was astonished that the Commission's December contribution did not contain an obvious and necessary improvement in the present Treaty provisions that would have allowed Parliament to initiate the procedure for removal of a Commissioner for "misconduct or incapacity". Mr Temple Lang once again opposed the idea that in the future there are fewer European Commissioners than Member States.
Mr Temple Lang notes that, the Commission repeats the suggestion that the President should have the power "to oppose any initiatives he judges inopportune" but that the Commission "is not a government…Its decision-making powers and its executive responsibilities, are much less important than its policy-forming powers. It would be a mistake o the first magnitude to sacrifice its independence and representative composition, essential for its policy-forming role, to the "executive" tasks, which it has been unwise enough to accept in recent yeas, although its is badly-equipped to carry them out".