←back to thread

398 points ChrisArchitect | 7 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source | bottom
Show context
impossiblefork ◴[] No.45142502[source]
I don't think this decision is wrong, I'm from the EU, and I think companies like Google have too much power anyway, but I don't like the ability of the commission to enforce things.

Here in Sweden we have a legal tradition where the government doesn't have power over the enforcement of the laws-- parliament can make any law it likes, and it can be anything, but enforcement and the courts are isolated from the politicians.

I really don't like that the commission can make up rules, or fine people etc. It's a bad system. It should be done by an impartial regular, or prosecutor or a court. This kind of system opens up the commission to political blackmail and threats from powerful states, it opens up for corruption, it opens up for uneven enforcement, and there's just no reason to have the system this way.

You could easily imagine a world where Google was a big US government darling and where they put their weight on the commission and got an outcome that isn't in accordance with law, but with the right system, one more like the Swedish system, that won't be possible.

replies(6): >>45142626 #>>45142772 #>>45142808 #>>45142895 #>>45142912 #>>45143223 #
nonethewiser ◴[] No.45142912[source]
Isnt the commission basically just he executive branch of the EU?

My understanding is Sweden's "SEC" (in US terms) is called Finansinspektionen. Wouldnt this EU commission be like the Finansinspektionen issuing a fine or revoking a license if a bank didnt comply with regulations? My understanding is the Finansinspektionen can do this sort of thing but has to go to the court for larger actions.

Perhaps the EU commission has a bit more leeway?

replies(2): >>45142983 #>>45143351 #
sam_lowry_ ◴[] No.45142983[source]
> Isnt the commission basically just he executive branch of the EU?

The European Commission is both the executive and legal branch. They propose the legislation that the European Parliament can only approve or reject. On the other hand, the European Patliament can not propose anything at all.

replies(2): >>45143426 #>>45144354 #
1. layer8 ◴[] No.45143426[source]
That’s not quite accurate. There is an extended process in which the Parliament and the Council can give input and propose and discuss changes to the Commission’s proposal, to work out a compromise: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_legislative_pro...
replies(2): >>45143652 #>>45143785 #
2. tmp10423288442 ◴[] No.45143652[source]
How feasible is it in practice? In the US, it's possible in practice to remove officials via impeachment as well as amend the constitution, but in practice they are almost impossible to achieve. In practice the legislature is almost deadlocked for most non-budget bills as well, so the executive ends up running the country, with an assist from the judiciary.
replies(1): >>45143752 #
3. layer8 ◴[] No.45143752[source]
Reaching agreement through the trilogue is the standard practice: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trilogue_meeting#Increasing_us...
replies(1): >>45143809 #
4. sam_lowry_ ◴[] No.45143785[source]
You are even less accurate. The Council is not an independent body. It represents the member states directly.

The Commission is elected by member states and thus represents them indirectly.

replies(2): >>45143827 #>>45146500 #
5. sam_lowry_ ◴[] No.45143809{3}[source]
Yes, and they are non-public and they effectively excluse parliamentary debates.
6. layer8 ◴[] No.45143827[source]
And all of them represent the EU citizens who elected both the Parliament and the Member States governments. I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make. The point I tried to make is that the Parliament has significant input to the legislation in the process, it’s not just a binary yes or no.
7. ajb ◴[] No.45146500[source]
The commission is not elected, it is appointed by the member states (I think it should be elected, but I'm in the UK so wouldn't have a vote anyway)