4. Conclusions

4. Conclusions

In this chapter, we have explained and discussed the implementation principles by different institutions on the EU level. Attention was given to the EU administration, the EU Commission, and the controlling institutions—the Court of Justice and the Ombudsman both on the EU level.

We started with the EU Commission and noted that this institution has developed two important instruments, normative frameworks, for good governance. The first instrument was the 2001 White Paper in which the Commission developed five important principles of good governance because of its much-needed reform. These principles were openness, participation, accountability, effectiveness, and coherence. These five principles of good administration were seen as mechanisms to reinforce the principles of proportionality and subsidiarity. In the frame of this paper, the following action points were worked out by the Commission: better involvement, better policies, regulation and delivery, the EU’s contribution to global governance, and refocused policies and institutions. So, the principles should influence in a preventive way the governance of the Commission by developing good governance. The White Paper was followed by the 2004 binding Code of Good Administrative Behaviour for Staff of the European Commission. This was a normative framework with principles of good administration which should be enforced in relation to activities of staff members of the Commission.

The second institution is the EU Court of Justice. An important framework on the principles of good governance also for the Court are the treaties: the Lisbon Treaty and the Charter on Fundamental Rights. In addition to the further evolution of the general principles common to all European administrative law systems, other principles are also mentioned and further developed: like the right of every person to have his or her affairs handled within a reasonable time by a European institution with the right to sound administration. The need to act within a reasonable time period in conducting administrative proceedings relating to competition policy is a general principle of EU law. The infringement of that principle would justify the annulment of the respective decision. But violating this principle can also be an infringement of the rights of defence, which can be relevant in relation to liability issues. Later, the Court developed jurisprudence on transparency and on the right of access to documents. With article 41 of the Charter, the jurisprudence on the right of good administration, there is potentially the possibility of a new line of thinking in the jurisprudence. Nevertheless, it seems that the Court is working on it step by step, focusing on sub-principles, and only partly on new principles like effectiveness.

The European Ombudsman has developed, based on its own ombudsprudence, a Code of Good Administrative Behaviour. This Code consisted of three parts and each part has principles with a different character. The first part contains the general articles (articles 1–3) relations with the institutions and their officials; necessary measures (most EU-institutions have special codes); all relations. The second part is about the classical basic principles of administrative law (articles 4–12, 16–19, and 22–23) like lawfulness etc. In the third part, we find the articles about good administrative functioning (articles 13–15, 20–21, and 24). These articles are about replies to letters, acknowledgement of receipt, transfer to competent service, notification (transparency), data protection, keeping adequate records. In essence, we find in all these three parts different elements of the principles of good administration.

In practice, the focus of the Ombudsman is, according to its recent annual report: transparency in EU decision-making, lobbying transparency, transparency in economic and financial decision-making, access to EU documents, ethical issues, EU agencies and other bodies, and finally EU contracts and grants. So, in relation to good administration, the focus is especially on transparency and ethical issues.