The decisions of the European Court of Justice significantly affect Community legislation, similar to those of the U.S. Supreme Court, but by its nature the Court remains outside the scope of government-business relations.
2.
The room for improvement was also recognized at the Maastricht Summit (December 1991), one of whose declarations called for the Commission to submit a report “designed to improve public access to the information available to the institutions” no later than 1993. As follow-up, the Commission issued two communications—“increasing transparency in the work of the Commission” and “an open and structured dialogue between the Commission and special interest groups”—in December 1992. It also promised to issue a separate communication in early 1993 on improvements in the way it communicates with and informs the general public.
3.
Whatever the pattern, the number of organizations, companies and other groups seeking to influence EC decision making has jumped dramatically. The 1991 edition of The Directory of Pressure Groups in the European Community [PhilipAlan Butt, ed. (Harlow, Essex, UK: Longman Group Ltd.)] lists over 800 pressure groups and other organizations, more than double the figure of ten years earlier. Another indicator is the membership of the EC Committee of the American Chamber of Commerce that has more than doubled in the past three years. The Commission estimates that there are approximately 3,000 “special interest groups” of various types in Brussels with up to 10,000 employees.
4.
Taking its cue from the Parliament, the Commission noted in its 1992 work program that relations with interest groups must be more closely defined. Accordingly, it states that “consideration will … be given to the preparation of a code of conduct to govern relations with organizations set up for the specific purpose of handling relations with the Commission.”
5.
Naturally, some of the smaller groups do not actively participate in discussions on all issues.
