Over 15 years ago Joseph Jupille articulated the conditions under which actors clash over, rather than merely within, political institutions. He showed that between 1987 and 1997 the theory of procedural politics helped explain why and when EU institutions contested the legal basis of EU legislation. The two key determinants in the theory are jurisdictional ambiguity and actors' desire to maximize their own procedural influence. This article examines the theory's ongoing relevance by putting it through a fresh test with 20 years' worth of new data. Although I find robust evidence of the theory's explanatory value beyond 1997, the phenomenon of procedural politics appears currently at its tail end, largely consistent with Jupille's prediction that treaty change increases the probability of institutional contestation.

中文翻译：

---

重新审视程序政治：欧盟权限争端中的制度激励和司法模糊

15 多年前，约瑟夫·朱皮勒 (Joseph Jupille) 阐明了行动者在政治机构之间而不是仅仅在政治机构内部发生冲突的条件。他表明，在 1987 年至 1997 年期间，程序政治理论有助于解释欧盟机构为何以及何时质疑欧盟立法的法律基础。该理论的两个关键决定因素是管辖权的模糊性和行为者希望最大限度地发挥其自身程序影响的愿望。本文通过使用 20 年价值的新数据对其进行全新测试来检验该理论的持续相关性。尽管我发现该理论在 1997 年之后的解释价值的有力证据，但程序政治现象目前出现在其尾端，这与 Jupille 的预测基本一致，即条约变更增加了制度争论的可能性。