Page - 140 - in Austrian Law Journal, Volume 2/2018
Image of the Page - 140 -
Text of the Page - 140 -
ALJ 2018 Hannes Hofmeister 140
EFSF2 and the EFSM3 – worth several hundred billion euros. Later in 2011, the so-called six-pack
measures were enacted, introducing a macroeconomic surveillance mechanism and better
budgetary surveillance. 2012 then saw the signing of the ‘Treaty on Stability, Coordination and
Governance in the Economic and Monetary Union’ - commonly referred to as the Fiscal Compact.
The latter aims to complement the six-pack measures by obliging states to introduce so called
‘debt-brakes’.
However, all these measures have not yet brought about the desired effect. The biggest flaw in the
EU’s strategy thus far has been that it sought ‘to muddle through the sovereign-debt crisis rather
than get on top of it’.4 The establishment of a permanent European Stability Mechanism (ESM) in
2012 was supposed to put an end to this ‘muddling through’ strategy and provide a solid, clearly
structured mechanism to prevent future crises. But the ‘big bazooka’5 – as it is sometimes referred
to – also suffers from a fundamental flaw: It constitutes an anomaly in the EU system insofar as it
is an intergovernmental institution based on an international treaty between the nineteen euro
area Member States and not an EU institution. At the same time it is – at least to a certain extent -
integrated into the institutional framework of the EU: For instance, the ECJ is tasked with solving
disputes between the ESM and ESM Member States. This ‘partial involvement’ of EU institutions in
an intergovernmental mechanism has generated a ‘complex landscape where judicial protection,
respect of fundamental rights and democratic accountability are fragmented and unevenly
implemented’.6
All in all, this created a bizarre and opaque situation. On December 6, 2017, the Commission
therefore proposed to integrate – as part of a comprehensive EMU reform package – the ESM into
the EU legal framework. In the course of this process the ESM should also be given additional tasks
and be renamed European Monetary Fund (EMF). But will these changes finally put an end to the
‘muddling through’ strategy? Will they achieve the objectives set, i.e. making EMU more efficient,
coherent and democratic? And – on a more practical note - has the EU the competence to establish
such a mechanism at all?
In order to answer these complex questions, this article will be structured as follows:
(1) It will first analyse the main features of the new EMF.
(2) It will then set out the rationale for integrating the new mechanism into the EU legal
framework.
(3) Having done so, it will then examine whether such integration is legally possible. In other
words, it will analyse whether the EU has the competence to establish such a mechanism.
(4) It will then critically examine whether the new EMF will actually make EMU more efficient
and democratic.
2 EFSF is the abbreviation used for the ‘European Financial Stability Facility’.
3 EFSM is the abbreviation used for the ‘European Financial Stabilisation Mechanism’.
4 Hopes raised, punches pulled, THE ECONOMIST, Feb. 10 2012), available at
https://www.economist.com/node/18114793 (last visited Jan. 3, 2019).
5 Mario Draghi: the man behind Europe's 'big bazooka', THE TELEGRAPH, Feb. 29, 2012, available at
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/9113256/Mario-Draghi-the-man-behind-Europes-big-
bazooka.html (last visited Jan. 3, 2019).
6 Cf. Proposal for a Council regulation on the establishment of a European Monetary Fund, COM (2017) 827 final
(Dec. 6, 2017) at 3.
back to the
book Austrian Law Journal, Volume 2/2018"
Austrian Law Journal
Volume 2/2018
- Title
- Austrian Law Journal
- Volume
- 2/2018
- Author
- Karl-Franzens-Universität Graz
- Editor
- Brigitta Lurger
- Elisabeth Staudegger
- Stefan Storr
- Location
- Graz
- Date
- 2018
- Language
- German
- License
- CC BY 4.0
- Size
- 19.1 x 27.5 cm
- Pages
- 94
- Keywords
- Recht, Gesetz, Rechtswissenschaft, Jurisprudenz
- Categories
- Zeitschriften Austrian Law Journal