Mémoire
| Résumé : | This Master dissertation aims at attaining a theoretically grounded understanding of theSpitzenkandidaten process’ unexpected rejection in the follow-up to the 2019 Europeanelections of 23-26 May. While the European Council’s opposition to the concept isconsistent with the serious discrepancies in treaty interpretation found between bothinstitutions that are “jointly responsible for the smooth running of the process leadingto the election of the President of the European Commission” (TEU), Parliament’sretreat from its continuous threats to defend the Spitzenkandidaten is puzzling.Building upon a variety of theoretical insights from discursive neo-Institutionalism,legitimacy and EU democratic deficit theory as well as Erik Oddvar Eriksen and JohnErik Fossum’s three strategies put forward as solutions to the European Union’slegitimacy challenges, the empirical part assesses the discursive strategies employedby EP Groups in relevant plenary debates before and after the elections when referringto the Spitzenkandidaten. The results provide support to the hypothesis that EP actorsshifted discursively towards a policy and power related strategy in order to justify thedisregard of the Spitzenkandidaten process and the election of Ursula von der Leyen asEuropean Commission president in exchange for policy and inter-institutional gains. |
