The State of the European Union. The European Parliament faces its most important elections yet

THE DIFFICULT ROAD TOWARDS A NECESSARY EUROPEAN FEDERAL UNION 59 incapable of addressing crises like the one that has struck Europe over the last decade. There may be a repeat of the crisis, which means that it is necessary to tackle reforms that, at a bare min- imum, complete an economic and fiscal union that backs monetary union and, at best, aspire to build a European federal union that completes the process begun in Rome in 1957 and which reached political maturity in Maastricht in 1992. We favour the latter course of action. We be- lieve that the EU is stuck halfway between a con- federation of states and a federation of states and citizens and that this lack of definition is causing dysfunctions and ineffectiveness. It is also not very transparent and distant from citi- zens. The reluctance and fears of many towards greater integration, which could become irre- versible, have hindered the completion of the process so far. We think that it is essential to complete the path taken, relaunching the EU on federal foundations, while aware of the ambition and the degree of difficulty that the endeavour involves, if we want the EU to achieve its main goal, which is to improve the life of Europeans. To do so, it will be necessary to reform the Union’s institutional framework, following the principles of maximum participation and of clarity in terms of the goals (more democracy, more political in- tegration, more effectiveness, more equity) and in terms of the distribution of competences among the institutions. An institutional architecture for a federal Europe The EU has a complex institutional architecture. Institutions that operate according to an inter- governmental method – by unanimity or major- ity, depending on the case –, where the member states of the Union are represented, sit side-by- side with others of a community nature con- taining the representatives chosen directly or indirectly by the citizens and which – in theory at least – are independent from the national states. This structure already prefigures a fed- eral framework, in which doctrinally there is a dual legitimacy: that of the states that make up the federation and that of the individual citi- zens. However, in the case of the EU, the sepa- ration of the two sources of power has not been fully completed yet. It remains somewhat confused and the functioning of the whole suf- fers from certain legal imprecisions or short- comings, which means that some institutions do not quite perform the functions that should fall to them, while others overstep the limits of their missions. In a federal system, the balance between the representation of the territorial bodies and that of the citizens is essential for the whole to work. In the EU, those duties fall respectively to the Council of the EU or the Council, which acts like a territorial chamber – in the manner of the Senate in the United States –, and the European Parliament, which acts like a regular lower house in direct representation of the people. While there may be particular cases, the align- ment of competences and powers between the two is fundamental if the delicate federal struc- ture is not to founder. The Parliament also has control over the executive power, which is the European Commission. Judicial power lies in the Court of Justice of the EU. And crowning it all is the highest institution, the European Council, which must act as a collective head of state with no direct responsibilities in the management of ordinary affairs or in legislation. If this architecture is completed properly, giv- ing each institution its due competences and the legal, political and material instruments that it needs to exercise them, the EU will gain in