Europe stands at the face of transformative changes, where the study of EU integration becomes crucial in comprehending the complex dynamics between member states and EU institutions, as well envisioning its future. Since its origin, the parliament has played a fundamental role in advancing political integration across national borders by representing EU citizens.  However, recent years have witnessed shifts that seem to alter the European Parliaments role and its leaning towards integration, indicating a move towards increased intergovernmentalism within the EU.  By examining its historical progress and stances towards integration, we can gain deeper insights into how its role has shifted and how it affects the EU's future, done by comparing two different periods, 2004-2009 and current election period 2019-2024. By using competing theories of European integration, this paper purposes to map out implications for the European union future. This study seeks to seal a significant research gap by investigating the European Parliament's role in integration. By analyzing parliamentary materials with debates longitudinally, this research aims to identify shifts in attitudes towards European integration. Results were shown that indicated the European parliament’s attitude towards integration had its changes in recent decades. From previously being a strong advocate for deeper integration, the European parliament has now a more nuances view of supranationality and intergovernmental collaboration. Future directions for European integration suggest a more cautious and gradual approach, continuing to cooperate without transferring excessive power to central EU bodies. This could have reaching implications for the future of the union and for the role of the European parliament in the continued integration process.  This study on the role of the European Parliament and its integration is of great importance to political science, since of its ability to surround various aspects of the EU’s political landscape. Understanding these dynamics is essential for predicting future developments and shaping policies that foster a solid and strong European union.

Muslims and islam are unquestionably a part of European social life. In recent times, however, different events, such as the enlargement of the EU and the fact that muslims to a higher extent demand their rights, have brought a number of questions to the fore concerning muslims and islam in Europe. Moreover, we can see an increasing level of islamophobia in contemporary Europe, but also that the EU has launched several programs to increase both the diversity and the unity throughout the Union and to combat islamophobia. However, most of these programs focus on islam as religion and muslims in general, and such a narrow viewpoint runs the risk of missing important issues. In this new context it would be interesting to widen the scope and ask what place not only the muslim community and islam, but also sharia (an important element in islam), may have in future Europe – especially when it comes to muslim identity? My main objects are to see how the concept of sharia is constructed in the debates in the European Parliament, how that discourse relates to a social practice – the increasing islamophobic ideas in Europe – and what effect this may have on muslim identity in a European context. The results shows that the Parliament constructs sharia as, for example, something archaic, threatening, inhuman and misogynistic. In that sense, the discourse fits in with the predominant order of discourse regarding islam and muslims (in Europe) – and strengthen it. Though my results are neither absolute nor uniform, they show, persuasively enough, that sharia (as it is seen by the Parliament) is not consistent with and can not be included in or accepted by “European norms and values”. However, this must be said with one reservation: sharia is not always excluded as a whole. Still, it is not difficult to maintain that it is sharia as such that activates the (negative and) excluding connotations. Thus, an “approved” European muslim identity, as it seems, can not have too close connections with sharia, if (any) at all. Moreover, there is a risk that muslims themselves take on a restricting practice concerning their identity. In all, this will to a large extent circumscribe the possible muslim identities in Europe. To form a substantial and really pluralistic diversity in Europe, the EU, and others, must liberate itself from the logic of these discourses. But this is not an easy thing to do. One way that might be profitable, is to challenge the prevailing discourse with new narratives – narratives and voices that for the most part must come from the muslims themselves. Despite the fact that these voices do exist, as has been shown, the question is how and under what circumstances they can be seen – or rather heard. Unfortunately the answer is not to be found in this thesis; the need of further research is obvious.