Historical Background of AFCO From the Luxembourg Compromise to Brexit - The crisis of the EU’s institutional architecture: In light of the debates regarding the perceived democratic deficit of the EU institutions, the Spitzenkandidat process and a Multi-speed Europe with different level of integration among its Member States, how can the EU reform its institutional framework whilst protecting its Member States’ interests and fueling democratic participation? European cooperation has undergone many developments throughout the years, and what began as a trade union was gradually delegated by its member increasingly political powers. It is no wonder that within Europe, many visions and opinions for the Union at large exists - some of which in direct opposition to one another. Such visions can also be seen in practice with different levels of intergovernmental cooperation, yet always caught between the two competing ideologies, the cooperation of sovereign Member States or a federal union. The EU has developed within the confines of these two extremes, oftentimes also through indirect means (judicial activism of the European Court of Justice).
The outcome being a compromise, a tug of war between three institutions representing the trinity of the European Agenda (citizens, Member States’ governments and the Union). Yet as solutions were found in the interest of preserving a functioning internal market, a clear pathway towards further integration or looser political ties is often overlooked for the sake of compromise. With the unprecedented decision of the UK to withdraw from the Union, however, decisions makers have now the chance to redress the Union’s institutional infrastructure with the aim of making it both more democratically accountable, but also address the growing gap between the two antipodal visions for the future of the EU.