The Politicization of the Appointment of the Commission and the Confirmation Hearings

In 1995 the EP started organizing appointment hearings, after the Maastricht Treaty granted the EP the right to subject the appointment of the Commission to a motion of approval. Through three-hour question- and answer sessions, organized before the confirmation vote, MEPS can examine candidate commissioner in public on a host of topics, including their backgrounds, integrity and views on the most pressing issues facing the EU. From the 2004 investiture on, Parliament has used its role in the appointment of the Commission to press for the replacement of certain controversial candidates and to force adjustments to certain portfolios. Increasingly candidates being rejected because of their lack of knowledge of their portfolio, their vague answers and reluctance to make commitments, the existence of possible conflicts of interests in relation to the assigned portfolio and concerns regarding the financial improprieties and integrity of the candidate. The paper examines how the hearings evolved as a political accountability tool in the period 1999-2019. Drawing on a longitudinal analysis, this paper shows how the two decades of EP confirmation hearings have become key for Parliament’s holding the Commission to account. Although the EP hearings are barely focused on ideological disagreements, and much more on determining the suitability of the candidate, they have become progressively politicized.