Populism is a phenomenon that impacts not only nation-states and their institutions but also the institutions of international-supranational organizations. This is the case of the European Union, where populist radical right parties (PRRPs) – the most predominant type of populism in Europe – reached the Parliament in 1984, consolidated in 2014, and have since then participated in the debates about the European legislation. Such participation has been mainly framed by the current functioning of the European Parliament (EP), which grants greater importance to alliances instead of individual Members of the Parliament, thereby, PRRPs cooperated among themselves in three groups: the European Conservatives and Reformists, the Europe of Freedom and Direct Democracy, and the Europe of Nations and Freedom. Particularly in migration, a key area of interest of these parties because of their nativist and authoritarian characteristics, these alliances have specific positions and therefore, have promoted different strategies aimed at increasing the powers of member states by diminishing European integration, strengthening the EU external borders, and preventing the arrival of new immigrants, especially the illegal ones. This was particularly reinforced in the 8th parliamentary period that lasted from 2014 to 2019, which also coincided with the 2015 refugee crisis. In this context, the EP adopted and implanted various legislation to cope with the crisis, including the European Border and Coast Guard, the European travel document for the return of illegally staying third-country nationals, the Entry/Exit System, the European Travel Information and Authorization System, and the reinforcement of the mandate of the EU-LISA agency. In 30.905 words, this research aims at understanding whether PRRPs’ characteristics and positions have influenced the EU immigration legislation, measured by how successful have been the two common strategies they undertake to do so: influencing the voters’ attitudes and opinions and obstructing parliamentary proceedings. Data shows that these groups still have a minority in the Parliament, do not vote together as a bloc, some of them do not actively participate in parliamentary work, and therefore, have limited power to impact the legislation as they can only do it indirectly by shaping the behavior of their electoral force.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:UPSALLA1/oai:DiVA.org:uu-486616 |
| Date | January 2022 |
| Creators | Silva Campos, María Belén |
| Publisher | Uppsala universitet, Teologiska institutionen, University of Deusto |
| Source Sets | DiVA Archive at Upsalla University |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Student thesis, info:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesis, text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
Page generated in 0.0012 seconds