The Council Presidency's Response to the Rule of Law Crisis : A Qualitative Analysis of the Varying Levels of Support for Rule of Law Enforcement Among Presidencies of the Council of the European Union

Sammanfattning

The European Union (EU) faces a rule of law (RoL) crisis that it struggles to address adequately. While existing research suggests that the rotating presidency of the Council of the EU gives member state governments the power to influence the Council's work, it remains underexplored how different governments exercise this power to shape the agenda on EU RoL enforcement. This thesis seeks to describe how governments of EU member states with varying levels of democracy and party compositions approach RoL enforcement issues while holding the Council chair. It analyses the positions on RoL enforcement conveyed by four Council presidencies representing member state governments with varying regime and government types. A qualitative analysis was conducted of the arguments and strategies used by the presidencies when approaching RoL issues in their presidency programmes, material related to Council meetings, and additional communication channels. The results show that the presidencies expressed different positions on RoL enforcement and shaped the agenda in line with their own preferences. They approached RoL issues either by demonstrating a genuine commitment to RoL enforcement actions or by engaging symbolically with such issues while impeding or stalling progress on RoL enforcement during their six-month terms. The findings suggest that the presidency's regime and/or government types are connected to its positions on RoL enforcement. The results display how governments that engage in democratic backsliding, or share ideological sympathies with such behaviour, may undermine the EU's response to the RoL crisis while holding the Council chair.