Procedure : 2021/2632(RSP)
Document stages in plenary
Document selected : O-000029/2021

Texts tabled :

O-000029/2021 (B9-0020/2021)

Debates :

PV 08/06/2021 - 24

Votes :

Texts adopted :

Parliamentary questions
PDF 41kWORD 10k
22 April 2021
Question for oral answer  O-000029/2021
to the Council
Rule 136
Antonio Tajani, Domènec Ruiz Devesa
on behalf of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs
 Answer in plenary 
 Subject: Parliament’s right of inquiry

Following the proposal to replace Decision 95/167 on the detailed provisions governing the exercise of Parliament’s right of inquiry, which was adopted by Parliament on 16 April 2014, the Council and the Commission expressed their institutional and political will to engage in a dialogue with a view to agreeing on a new legal text.

In a non-paper of May 2018, the Committee on Constitutional Affairs suggested new wording for the adopted proposal, taking on board some of the concerns expressed by the Council. However, the Council raised ‘serious legal and institutional concerns’ regarding parts of the suggested new text, without further explanation, despite Parliament’s openness.

Following Parliament’s resolution of 18 April 2019 on the negotiations with the Council and Commission on the legislative proposal for a regulation on the European Parliament’s right of inquiry, the Conference of Presidents decided, on ​16 October 2019​, to resume the procedure on the basis of Parliament’s initial proposal.

The Council and Parliament clearly have a different interpretation of the special legislative procedure established in Article 226 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, which requires the consent of the Council and the Commission. Whereas Parliament’s interpretation is that this legal basis requires the three institutions to work in good faith towards an agreement on a common text, the Council does not feel bound to engage in negotiations and is refusing to discuss the regulation that has been suggested by Parliament.

Can the Council explain the reasons for this deadlock and provide institutional solutions to this specific political dialogue process, taking into account the special nature of the legislative procedure and the role of the three institutions in it, with a view to achieving a constructive dialogue going beyond refusing the legislative text altogether?

Can the Council reassure Parliament that it will swiftly engage in political dialogue with Parliament to reach an understanding allowing the procedure to be concluded, and to establish the appropriate legal framework for implementing Parliament’s right of inquiry, which represents a cornerstone of parliamentary democracy?

Submitted: 22.4.2021

Lapses: 23.7.2021

Last updated: 3 May 2021Legal notice - Privacy policy