The aim of the thesis is to explore how national street-level bureaucrats perceive their role when implementing EU soft law in a Europeanised environment. Existing studies have focused on the role perception of public servants working within implementation of EU hard law, or being diplomats or working on ministerial level. These studies find that there is an additional EU servant role perception, beyond the national servant role perception. It provides the theoretical and empirical expectation that the public servants on the street-level and within EU soft law are national servants and do not hold an additional EU role perception. The study uses theories on Europeanisation, identity and role perception, and street-level bureaucracy to further understand the case. The thesis is based on 13 semi-structured interviews to understand the role perception. The selected case is a least-likely study as it explores role perception of street-level bureaucrats within EU soft law. More precisely, the field of higher education and its internationalisation, as the study selects the Erasmus+ programme and street-level bureaucrats who work with its implementation in Sweden. This, to understand how they perceive their role when implementing an EU programme and in a Europeanised, but also national, environment. The findings of the thesis show that the street-level bureaucrats hold a national role perception but there are respondents who also present a perception of an additional EU role perception, for example five respondents who presented to be working for the EU in addition to the Higher Education Institution. Thus, it does not provide enough support for the theoretical and empirical expectations to be confirmed that street-level bureaucrats within EU soft law only hold a national servant role perception. Hence, it shows that it also exists a perception of also being an EU servant and holding loyalty to the EU.

Despite the rule of law being one of the founding values and objectives of the European Union, some of the Member States have disrespected the rule of law. In response, the European Commission has invented new tools to reinforce the rule of law. The newest tool is the Rule of Law Report, and the purpose of this thesis is to study the Report’s significance in ensuring respect for the rule of law in the EU. To do so a combination of legal methods and a range of sources, such as EU primary law, case-law, EU documents and doctrine, have been used. The Report is issued annually, so far it has been published in three editions stretching from 2020 to 2022. The Report builds on a general part and 27 country chapters assessing the rule of law situation in each Member State. From the 2022 Report onwards, the Report is also accompanied with recommendations to each Member State. The Report is to be considered soft law. It is non-binding and can, hence, not be subject to judicial review by the European Court of Justice, but it imposes a moral obligation on the institutions addressed. Mainly on the Member States, but also on the Council, the European Parliament, and other bodies of the EU. It is descriptive, interpretative and has a connection to hard law but can only be enforced by soft enforcement. Furthermore, the Report does not explicitly mention a legal basis, but the Commission appears to have the conferred powers to adopt the act. Moreover, the Report have had practical effects at national and EU-level, and it has potential to have even more effects. It urges national rule of law reforms and causes debate in the institutions and national parliaments about the rule of law situation. It could be subject to interpretation in the ECJ and in national courts and it could serve as a source to activate other hard tools in the rule of law toolbox. Despite being criticised, the Report has significance in ensuring respect for the rule of law in the EU. It might have a low legal status, but it has legal relevance, and it has the potential to have even higher legal relevance in the future.