Interference by the Commission in the domestic affairs of a Member State

21.10.2013

Question for written answer E-011999-13
to the Commission
Rule 117
Edite Estrela (S&D) , Rui Tavares (Verts/ALE)

According to reports published today in the Portuguese press, the acting Head of the Commission Representation in Portugal has sent a document to Brussels warning of the consequences of a ruling by the Constitutional Court on certain measures proposed in the State budget for 2014.

According to the reports, the document contains comments of a political nature and warns that a negative opinion from the Constitutional Court could possibly result in a second bailout.

When the Socialist Party tabled a motion of censure against the government, the aforementioned official set a precedent by expressing his political opposition to the initiative, disregarding the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union.

We are baffled and concerned and call on the Commission to clarify what the framework governing his role is and whether he is in a position to continue in his post.

Moreover, we are offended by the comments concerning the Portuguese Constitutional Court in the aforementioned document, which suggest that it is a ‘negative legislator’ and hold it responsible, in a blackmailing tone, for a potential second bailout and the attendant collapse of the current government.

Given that Article 4 of the Treaty on European Union establishes the equality of Member States before the Treaties and respect for their ‘political and constitutional’ structures, how can the Commission, as ‘guardian of the Treaties’, justify direct pressure being put on the Constitutional Court of a Member State?

In view of the provisions of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, does the Commission not think that this act is a clear case of interference in the domestic affairs of a Member State?

OJ C 218, 10/07/2014