Comitology

[8]" Moreover, the strongest criticism pertained to the fact that the elected European Parliament (EP) had no right to block implementing measures: only the comitology committees could do so, and if they did, the proposal was referred to Council alone, even when the initial delegation of powers was through an act adopted jointly by both Parliament and Council under the co-decision procedure.

The procedure gives Parliament and Council a period (normally of three months) to examine proposals that have been through a comitology committee.

The Single European Act introduced a legal basis for the first time and instructed the Council to adopt a Decision setting out the different procedures.

[10] Article 7 paragraph 5 of the Comitology Decision states that references of the documents transmitted to the Parliament should be made available to the public.

This regulation lays down "the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission's exercise of implementing powers".

Advisory committees give opinions which the Commission must take account of, but it retains the power of decision.

Under the Lisbon Treaty, the scenarios in which the regulatory procedure with scrutiny applied are now covered by the delegated act foreseen in Article 290 TFEU.

As sites of European governance which produce a vast amount of binding legislation, comitology's opaque mode of operation, unclear membership, and closed debate style has been the subject of criticism from both academics[3] and practitioners.