Abstract
THE PRINCIPLE OF SUBSIDIARITY IN THE EUROPEAN INTEGRATION PROCESS: AN ANALYSIS OF ITS USES AND SOURCES.
The aim with this thesis is to clarify the principle of subsidiarity and its role in the European integration process; what it is and where it comes from. "Subsidiarity" is a word that has been used in the context of European integration since the mid-1970s. It did, however, rarely surface from its relative obscurity before the the work on the Treaty on European Union (the Maastricht Treaty) came to a close in 1992. It was included in this treaty in a manner that was less than clear and left ample room for discussion of its meaning. After the ratification problems of the Treaty materialized, subsidiarity was seen by anxious European politicians as a major selling point of the Treaty towards a sceptic public in several EU member states. It was emphasized that the principle meant that only those matters that could not be handled at the national level would be transfered to the Community level. The word "nearness" was much in vogue at the time as a synonym for "subsidiarity", meaning that decisions should be taken as close to the citizens as possible.
"Nearness" is however only one aspect of the subsidiarity principle. Subsidiarity also means that decision-making competence can flow the other way, from local and national levels to the supranational, European, level. As politicians and bureaucrats tried to reach a common understanding of subsidiarity it became increasingly clear that there were fundamentally different perceptions in the EU of what subsidiarity implies. Specifically, some, like the German government under preassure from the Länder. argued that subsidiarity should not only be valid for the relationship between the member states and the Community, but also within the member states. Others, examplified by the UK government, objected strongly to this. Both sides could refer to articles from the Maastricht Treaty supporting their views Another dispute concerned which criterion was to be used to decide what was the "best" level for decision-making. Again Germany and the UK was at loggerheads. Germany wanted an ''efficiency approach", which would mean a lower threshold for Community action than the "necessity approach" favoured by the British. Another aspect of the subsidiarity principle over which there was some discussion was the role of the Court of Justice.
Subsidiarity seems to be one of the battlefields in the struggle between those who want the Community to develop into a United States of Europe on one hand, and those who want the Community to remain a confederation where the member states keep their power of veto over most issues. Whether the application ofthe principle will also have any lasting impact of the workings of the EU, is still too early to say.
The EU is a federal political system Hence the need for some kind of demarcation between the levels of decision-making. Every federal system7 by definition, has the need for some guidelines to decide what powers and competences should be placed where. Germany is the only federation where subsidiarity has played an explicit role in this process7 but the "bottom up" approach to distribution of competence that characterizes the principle of subsidiarity is typical among federations. Indeed7 the concepts "subsidiarity" and "federalism" are closely related.
The development of the principle of subsidiarity is closely linked to the Catholic church. The word "subsidiarity" was first used in a papal encyclical in 19317 but the principle had implicitely featured in Catholic social doctrine at least since the latter half of the 19th century with roots going back much longer. The principle of subsidiarity in its original Catholic setting7 and the one used in the present context of European integration are not the same, but several aspects of the former have found their way in to the EU's laws.