programs ’ 7 . In fact , debates were primarily shaped by anti-establishment and Eurosceptic parties rather than the lead candidates .
Parliamentarisation ?
While the innovation of the lead candidate process does not seem to have had a significant impact on awareness or turnout in the 2014 European elections , there is one more important question to ask : did it affect the EU ’ s interinstitutional dynamics ?
The 2014 election has been judged as a victory for the European Parliament , in its role as ‘ the constant challenger of the principles of EU governance ’ 8 . Parliament introduced a competition to define the shape of representative government which had been unthinkable for much of the EU ’ s history . After one of the lead candidates had become the Commission President , analysts built on the parliamentarisation thesis to affirm ‘ the institutionalisation of the Spitzenkandidaten ’ 9 . Studies assumed that the freshly established lead candidate process would have ‘ important implications for the interinstitutional dynamics in the Union and the future of European democracy ’ 10 . They argued that this procedure had constituted ‘ a decisive and perhaps irrevocable shift in the EU ’ s institutional balance from a system centred on the European Council to a parliamentary
7 . T . Christiansen , After the Spitzenkandidaten : Fundamental change in the EU ’ s political system ?, West European Politics , 39 ( 5 ), 2016 , p . 1007 .
8 . M . Shackleton . Transforming representative democracy in the EU ? The role of the European Parliament , Journal of European Integration , 39 ( 2 ), 2017 , pp . 191-205 .
9 . P . Kaniok & L . Hamřík , Is it all about European democracy ? The motives behind the institutionalisation of the Spitzenkandidaten procedure . Journal of Contemporary European Research , 15 ( 4 ), 2019 , pp . 354-377 .
10 . Hobolt ibid ., p . 1528 .
140