Choisissez la langue de votre document :
- bg - български
- es - español
- cs - čeština
- da - dansk
- de - Deutsch
- et - eesti keel
- el - ελληνικά
- en - English
- fr - français
- ga - Gaeilge
- hr - hrvatski
- it - italiano
- lv - latviešu valoda
- lt - lietuvių kalba
- hu - magyar
- mt - Malti
- nl - Nederlands
- pl - polski
- pt - português
- ro - română
- sk - slovenčina
- sl - slovenščina
- fi - suomi
- sv - svenska
|
 Waste Framework Directive: textiles and food waste |
| |||||||||||
(Ordinary legislative procedure: second reading) The European Parliament, – having regard to the Council position at first reading (06978/2/2025 – C10‑0139/2025), – having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 25 October 2023(1), – having regard to its position at first reading(2) on the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2023)0420), – having regard to Article 294(7) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, – having regard to the provisional agreement approved by the committee responsible under Rule 75(4) of its Rules of Procedure, – having regard to Rule 68 of its Rules of Procedure, – having regard to the recommendation for second reading of the Committee on the Environment, Climate and Food Safety (A10-0144/2025), 1. Approves the Council position at first reading; 2. Notes that the act is adopted in accordance with the Council position; 3. Instructs its President to sign the act with the President of the Council, in accordance with Article 297(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union; 4. Instructs its Secretary-General to sign the act, once it has been verified that all the procedures have been duly completed, and, in agreement with the Secretary-General of the Council, to arrange for its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union; 5. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.
| ||||||||||||
| Circularity requirements for vehicle design and management of end-of-life vehicles |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| EU-Brazil Agreement: cooperation with and through Europol and the Federal Police of Brazil |
| ||||||
(Consent) The European Parliament, – having regard to the draft Council decision (05617/2025), – having regard to the draft Agreement between the European Union and the Federative Republic of Brazil on cooperation with and through the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol) and the Federal Police of Brazil (05618/2025), – having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 16(2) and Article 88, and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a)(v), and Article 218(7), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C10‑0045/2025), – having regard to Rule 107(1) and (4), and Rule 117(7) of its Rules of Procedure, – having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A10-0142/2025), 1. Gives its consent to the conclusion of the agreement; 2. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of the Federative Republic of Brazil. | |||||||
| EU-Kyrgyz Republic Enhanced Partnership and Cooperation Agreement |
| |||||||||
(Consent) The European Parliament, – having regard to the draft Council decision (10724/22), – having regard to the Enhanced Partnership and Cooperation Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the Kyrgyz Republic, of the other part (10660/22), – having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Articles 207 and 209 and with Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a), and Article 218(7) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C10‑0057/2024), – having regard to its non-legislative resolution of 9 September 2025(1) on the draft decision, – having regard to Rule 107(1) and (4), and Rule 117(7) of its Rules of Procedure, – having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (A10-0105/2025), 1. Gives its consent to the conclusion of the agreement; 2. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of the Kyrgyz Republic.
| ||||||||||
| EU-Kyrgyz Republic Enhanced Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (Resolution) |
| |||||||||||||||||
The European Parliament, – having regard to the draft Council decision on the conclusion of the Enhanced Partnership and Cooperation Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the Kyrgyz Republic, of the other part (10724/22), – having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council on 27 June 2024 in accordance with Articles 207 and 209, in conjunction with Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a), and Article 218(7) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C10‑0057/2024), – having regard to the Enhanced Partnership and Cooperation Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the Kyrgyz Republic, of the other part(1) (EPCA), – having regard to the Joint Roadmap for Deepening Ties between the EU and Central Asia of 23 October 2023, – having regard to the joint communication by the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of 15 May 2019 entitled ‘The EU and Central Asia: New Opportunities for a Stronger Partnership’ (JOIN(2019)0009), – having regard to the Commission’s assessment reports on the EU’s Generalised Scheme of Preferences Plus (GSP+) with Kyrgyzstan, – having regard to the first EU-Central Asia summit on 4 April 2025, – having regard to the 11th High-Level Political and Security Dialogue between the European Union and the countries of Central Asia, held in Brussels on 5 June 2024, – having regard to the joint press statement of the President of the Kyrgyz Republic, Sadyr Zhaparov, and the then President of the European Council, Charles Michel, published on 3 June 2023, – having regard to the 14th Human Rights Dialogue, held in Bishkek on 25 June 2024, – having regard to the 19th meeting of the EU-Kyrgyzstan Cooperation Council, held in Brussels on 15 November 2022, – having regard to the opinions of the Venice Commission on recent legal amendments abridging the freedom of the press and hampering the work of non-governmental organisations in Kyrgyzstan, – having regard to reports on Kyrgyzstan published by human rights organisations, such as the 2022, 2023 and 2024 annual world reports by Human Rights Watch, – having regard to the International Partnership for Human Rights (IPHR) briefing on the protection of fundamental freedoms and civic space in Kyrgyzstan, published in February 2025, – having regard to its resolution of 17 January 2024 on the EU strategy on Central Asia(2), – having regard to its previous resolutions on Kyrgyzstan, notably that of 19 December 2024 on the human rights situation in Kyrgyzstan, in particular the case of Temirlan Sultanbekov(3), – having regard to the visit of the delegation of its Subcommittee on Human Rights to Kyrgyzstan from 25 to27 February 2025, – having regard to the statement by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Türk, following his official visit to Kyrgyzstan from 19 to 20 March 2025, – having regard to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, – having regard to its legislative resolution of 9 September 2025 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion, on behalf of the Union, of the Enhanced Partnership and Cooperation Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the Kyrgyz Republic, of the other part(4), – having regard to Rule 107(2) of its Rules of Procedure, – having regard to the report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (A10-0111/2025), A. whereas Kyrgyzstan occupies an important position in Central Asia, a region of increasing geopolitical significance that the EU has recognised as a key partner with which it engaged in structured dialogue at the first EU-Central Asia summit; B. whereas the EU and Kyrgyzstan have been partners since the country gained independence in 1991, and have established a comprehensive legal framework for their cooperation through the EU-Kyrgyzstan Partnership and Cooperation Agreement, signed in 1999; C. whereas the EU and Kyrgyzstan have recently agreed to deepen their partnership by signing an Enhanced Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (EPCA), which represents a modern and ambitious framework for strengthening dialogue and cooperation in key areas such as trade and investment, sustainable development and connectivity, research and innovation, education, the environment and climate change, as well as the rule of law, human rights and civil society; D. whereas the EPCA could also facilitate stronger cooperation on foreign and security policy, including conflict prevention and crisis management, risk reduction, cybersecurity, regional stability, disarmament, non-proliferation, arms control and arms export control; E. whereas the EPCA, which enhances the existing Partnership and Cooperation Agreement of 1999, was signed on 25 June 2024; whereas the EPCA requires Parliament’s consent for it to enter into force; F. whereas Kyrgyzstan has benefited from unilateral and preferential access to the EU market through the Generalised Scheme of Preferences Plus (GSP+) since 2016; whereas Kyrgyzstan has acceded to 27 international conventions related to labour and human rights, environmental and climate protection, and good governance in order to be able to benefit from this scheme; G. whereas the EU has allocated EUR 98 million to support governance and digital transformation, human development and a green and climate-resilient economy in Kyrgyzstan over the 2021-2027 period, aligning with the National Development Strategy of the Kyrgyz Republic; H. whereas the EU has allocated EUR 12 million to enhance the quality of legislation and increase the efficiency, independence, professionalism and capacities of the judiciary and services of the justice sector in Kyrgyzstan, thereby signalling its willingness to invest in stable growth that is consistent with the rule of law; whereas concerns over the independence of the judiciary persist, with politically motivated cases that target individuals critical of the government; whereas the 2021 reform of the Criminal Code of the Kyrgyz Republic has reintroduced the heavily criticised 1997 version of the Code, which gives greater power to law enforcement while reducing citizens’ rights; I. whereas the EPCA stipulates that the EU and Kyrgyzstan shall cooperate to strengthen civil society and its role in the economic, social and political development of an open democratic society; J. whereas Kyrgyzstan ranks 100th in the 2025 Global Terrorism Index of the Institute for Economics and Peace, and has been classified as a country with ‘no impact’ of terrorism; K. whereas, despite the Government of Kyrgyzstan repeatedly expressing its commitment to the principles of democracy and respect for human rights and the rule of law, human rights organisations have called attention to democratic backsliding and hardening authoritarian practices and persecution of civil society organisations in Kyrgyzstan in recent years, including during the negotiation of the EPCA and since its signing, with Transparency International and Freedom House finding that Kyrgyzstan has turned from a bastion of democracy with a vibrant civil society to a consolidated authoritarian regime that uses its justice system to target critics and whose authorities further undermine the balance of power and the system of checks and balances; L. whereas Kyrgyzstan ranks 146 out of 180 countries in Transparency International’s 2024 Corruption Perceptions Index; whereas, at President Japarov’s initiative, the law on public procurement was amended to allow state-owned enterprises to circumvent tendering procedures; whereas there is no proper oversight of public spending due to a lack of access to such information; whereas state funds and national resources are used by the ruling elites to consolidate their power, silence dissent and resist reform; M. whereas human rights defender, investigative journalist and founder of the Temirov Live media outlet, Bolot Temirov, has been stripped of his Kyrgyz citizenship and forced to leave the country in retaliation for his work investigating widespread corruption; whereas at least 11 of his colleagues were arrested in January 2024, including Makhabat Tajibek kyzy, Azamat Ishenbekov, Aike Beishekeyeva and Aktilek Kaparov; N. whereas in July 2025, independent journalist and activist Kanyshai Mamyrkulova was sentenced to four years on probation in retaliation for her social media posts critical of the government; whereas in June 2025, 11 people affiliated with Kloop, an independent media outlet, were detained in retaliation for Kloop’s investigative work and alleged connection to Bolot Temirov, and Aleksandr Aleksandrov and Zhoomart Duulatov are still in detention; whereas human rights activist Rita Karasartova has been in pre-trial detention since April 2025; O. whereas Kyrgyz Government propaganda has used false narratives to discredit independent media in the eyes of society and to portray them as ‘enemies of the people’ and ‘slaves of the West’; P. whereas in recent years, democratic standards and human rights have deteriorated alarmingly in Kyrgyzstan; whereas Kyrgyzstan has fallen from 72nd to 144th place in the Reporters Without Borders World Press Freedom Index; whereas it ranks as the country that has had the sharpest decline in press freedom leading up to 2025; Q. whereas the Kyrgyz authorities seek to shut down Aprel TV; whereas, as stated by the Committee to Protect Journalists, the prosecutors’ filing indicates that the authorities seek to shut down the media outlet on the basis of allegations that the outlet’s critical reporting portrays the authorities ‘in an unfavourable light’ and ‘undermines the authority of the government’; R. whereas Parliament expressed its concern about the persecution of opposition parties and independent media in its resolutions of 13 July 2023(5) and of 19 December 2024; whereas the persecution of members of the Social Democrats party (SDK) persists, despite repeated calls to ensure free and fair elections; whereas the leader of the SDK, Temirlan Sultanbekov, and two other members, Irina Karamushkina and Roza Turksever, remain in detention; whereas there is cause for concern about Temirlan Sultanbekov’s medical condition following his prolonged hunger strike; S. whereas Kyrgyz courts have issued multiple convictions related to the 2019 Koi-Tash events, in which security forces attempted to detain a former head of state at his residence, triggering violent clashes; whereas these events are at the centre of an ongoing trial that began in 2022 and involves charges of inciting unrest, corruption and money laundering against the former president, several former officials and various political figures; whereas concerns have been raised over the politicisation of the judiciary and the use of criminal charges to target opposition figures; whereas allegations that the defendants have been tortured and subjected to inhuman treatment are deeply concerning; T. whereas the Russian-style ‘foreign representatives’ law, adopted by the Kyrgyz Parliament in March 2024, which requires non-profits that receive funding from abroad and engage in broadly defined political activity to register as ‘foreign representatives’, discriminates against and stigmatises journalists, human rights activists and other non-profit workers and subjects them to intrusive oversight, burdensome reporting requirements and excessive fines; whereas this law mimics repressive legislation in other authoritarian regimes and can be considered a precursor to further attempts to suppress independent civil society and media; U. whereas the crackdown on human rights has targeted LGBTIQ+ people in particular; whereas Kyrgyzstan’s new legislative landscape, along with the broader political shift and repression, has effectively decimated the work of LGBTIQ+ rights organisations and activists, with key organisations completely shut down; whereas on 14 August 2023, Kyrgyzstan enacted discriminatory provisions against the LGBTIQ+ community under the pretext of protecting minors from ‘harmful information’; whereas the anti-discrimination bill recently considered by the Kyrgyzstan Supreme Council failed to include sexual orientation and gender identity as protected categories; V. whereas the law adopted on 6 October 2023 giving the President of Kyrgyzstan the power to overturn rulings of the Constitutional Court if they conflict with his own interpretation of ‘moral values’ fundamentally weakens the separation of powers – a foundational element of the rule of law – and constitutes a hollowing out of judicial independence in Kyrgyzstan; W. whereas the State Committee for National Security (GKNB) has become one of the most powerful institutions in Kyrgyzstan, often acting as the real centre of decision-making and, in some cases, overshadowing elected officials; whereas this consolidation of unchecked power has created a de facto system of dual authority that undermines democratic institutions, fosters fear and stifles dissent; whereas the Kyrgyz Government should ensure that the GKNB’s activities are subject to independent judicial and parliamentary oversight; X. whereas Kyrgyzstan is increasingly investing in the promotion of gender equality and women’s empowerment, particularly through key national frameworks such as the National Strategy on Gender Equality until 2030; whereas Kyrgyzstan still faces high rates of domestic violence, over 20 % of marriages in Kyrgyzstan occur through ‘ala kachuu’ (bride kidnapping) and women hold only 22 % of parliamentary seats despite existing gender quotas; whereas, on average, women earn 25 % less than men, as they are predominantly employed in low-paying sectors such as education, healthcare and social services; Y. whereas the Kyrgyz authorities have engaged in actions that limit freedom of speech in the country and have arrested, put in long pre-trial detention or imprisoned journalists, bloggers, poets and regular social media users for criticising the country’s leadership or the situation in the country, and have also closed down an award-winning investigative media outlet; Z. whereas Kyrgyzstan ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in 2014; whereas tentative steps have been taken towards improving accessibility for persons with disabilities and introducing the concept of inclusive education, though challenges remain, in particular concerning the institutionalisation of persons with disabilities; AA. whereas the law on ‘false information’, enacted on 24 August 2021, has been used to target independent media and individuals critical of the government; whereas on 10 April 2025, the Supreme Council of Kyrgyzstan approved amendments to the law that provide for administrative sanctions for the dissemination of ‘false information’ on social media; AB. whereas the Supreme Council of Kyrgyzstan is currently considering the re-criminalisation of the possession of ‘extremist’ materials, which has previously been misused against peaceful religious practitioners, and which, on account of the bill’s vague wording, could be used to silence legitimate political speech; AC. whereas two new laws on freedom of religion came into force on 1 January 2025; whereas these laws maintain the ban on all unregistered exercise of freedom of religion or belief and make it impossible for communities with fewer than 500 adult members to gain legal status; AD. whereas the negligence of the Kyrgyz law enforcement authorities in response to a campaign of intimidation and harassment has forced journalists and human rights workers to flee the country; AE. whereas the Kyrgyz authorities have silenced, arrested, detained and extradited refugees fleeing Russia for protesting against the war in Ukraine, contravening Kyrgyzstan’s obligation under the UN Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees not to return people to countries where their life or freedom is under threat on account of their political views, or where there are substantial grounds for believing that they would be in danger of being subjected to serious human rights violations such as torture or other forms of cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment or punishment; AF. whereas the Presidents of Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan signed a border demarcation agreement on 13 March 2025, which legally recognises the borders between the two countries and allows for the development of interstate roads and energy infrastructure, contributing to regional stability and opportunities for enhanced cross-border cooperation on energy, transport and trade; whereas the border agreement itself has not been made public or open to public consultations; AG. whereas the leaders of Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan signed the Khujand Declaration of Eternal Friendship on 31 March 2025; AH. whereas the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Türk, has drawn attention to the concerning signs of democratic backsliding in Kyrgyzstan in recent years, with particular emphasis on the increasing restrictions on civil society and independent journalism; AI. whereas Central Asia has yet to create horizontal regional frameworks free from the dominance of external actors pursuing their own geopolitical gains; AJ. whereas Kyrgyzstan has historically close and intertwined relations with Russia, with both being members of the Eurasian Economic Union, the Collective Security Treaty Organization and the Commonwealth of Independent States; whereas in October 2023, Kyrgyz President Sadyr Japarov hosted Russian President Vladimir Putin in Bishkek during Putin’s first foreign trip since the International Criminal Court issued an arrest warrant against him; whereas Kyrgyzstan, along with other Central Asian countries, has become a transit point for circumventing sanctions imposed on Russia for its war of aggression against Ukraine; whereas exports of advanced technology and dual-use items to Kyrgyzstan – which are then exported to Russia – have significantly increased; whereas Kyrgyzstan has either abstained from voting or sided with Russia on votes on numerous UN resolutions on human rights and, in particular, on Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; whereas Kyrgyzstan has decided to join the Russian-Belarusian Zapad 2025 military exercise near the EU border; AK. whereas OJSC Keremet Bank, based in Kyrgyzstan, was involved in a sanctions evasion scheme with Russian state-owned defence bank Promsvyazbank Public Joint-Stock Company (PSB), where it facilitated cross-border transfers on behalf of PSB; whereas in 2024, the Kyrgyz Ministry of Finance sold a controlling stake in Keremet Bank to a Russian oligarch with ties to the Russian Government; whereas the United States has imposed sanctions on Keremet Bank; AL. whereas in October 2024, Bakai Bank OJSC Kyrgyzstan, based in Kyrgyzstan, initiated civil legal proceedings in Belgium against the Open Dialogue Foundation (ODF) for alleged reputational harm resulting from two reports published in 2023 by ODF that argue that certain Kyrgyz banks, including Bakai Bank, facilitated sanction evasion for Russian nationals; whereas Bakai Bank OJSC Kyrgyzstan seeks compensation amounting to EUR 1 050 000 in damages, plus additional financial penalties in the event of non-compliance with any future judgement; whereas the bank waited 18 months after the publication of the reports before filing suit, suggesting a lack of immediate reputational damage; whereas in July 2025, the Brussels Commercial Court rejected all provisional measures sought by the claimant to remove the 2023 ODF publications; whereas this case can be considered a SLAPP case against a civil society organisation; EU-Kyrgyzstan EPCA 1. Despite the shared interests in strengthening the EU-Kyrgyzstan important political and trade relations, is concerned by the deteriorating situation of human rights, democracy and the rule of law in Kyrgyzstan, particularly in the context of the completion of negotiations and the signing of the EPCA; calls on the Kyrgyz authorities, in this context, to respect and uphold fundamental freedoms, in particular media freedom and freedom of expression, and to foster an environment of cooperation and involvement of civil society and local communities in public consultations and decision-making processes; underlines the importance of Parliament’s close involvement in monitoring the implementation of all parts of the EPCA; calls for an effective evaluation by both parties to the agreement, to be conducted within two years, of the implementation of its essential elements, with clear human rights benchmarks and time frames; calls on the Commission to present to Parliament the outcome of such evaluations; expects that, given the recent backsliding on these fronts and ahead of the EPCA vote in the European Parliament and its subsequent implementation, the Kyrgyz Government will take some concrete steps towards addressing the pressing concerns outlined in this report, such as releasing political prisoners and repealing recently adopted repressive legislation; considers that a negative assessment of the implementation of these essential elements could lead to Article 316 of the EPCA being triggered; EU-Kyrgyzstan relations 2. Welcomes the long-standing and strategic relations between the EU and Kyrgyzstan, as well as the increasing cooperation and exchanges; recalls that Kyrgyzstan is the EU’s third-largest trading partner in Central Asia; reiterates its commitment to work together with the country and with its partners in Central Asia to ensure peace, security, stability, prosperity, democracy and sustainable development; 3. Welcomes the outcomes of the first EU-Central Asia summit held in Samarkand on 4 April 2025; welcomes their commitment to regional and global stability, to the promotion and protection of the rule of law, human rights and fundamental freedoms, and to addressing climate action, connectivity and education; notes also the 20th EU-Central Asia Ministerial meeting held in Ashgabat on 27 March 2025; 4. Highlights the need for cooperation in promoting green initiatives based on a sustainable market economy, private sector innovation, and long-term environmental stewardship, early warning systems for natural disasters, low-carbon development and the transition to renewable energy sources; highlights Kyrgyzstan’s initiatives to promote the mountain agenda on global platforms, including the preservation of mountain ecosystems, the protection of the environment and the development of sustainable tourism and mountain communities; stresses that investments in Kyrgyzstan’s green energy goals would significantly contribute to reducing the country’s regional energy dependence and to tackling environmental challenges; commends the Kyrgyz Republic’s involvement in the Team Europe Initiative on Water, Energy and Climate Change; 5. Supports Kyrgyzstan’s efforts towards sustainable development, aligning its initiatives with the country’s National Development strategy for 2018-2040, alongside the EU’s Global Gateway strategy and the EU strategy for Central Asia; recalls that the EU-Kyrgyz partnership prioritises governance and digital transformation in order to enhance transparency and efficiency in public administration; 6. Welcomes Team Europe initiatives seeking to build a green and climate-resilient economy in order to address environmental challenges and promote sustainable growth; highlights the recent signing of the agreement between the Kyrgyz Ministry of Finance and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, which will strengthen the Kyrgyz Climate-Resilient Water Services Programme; 7. Calls on the Commission and the European External Action Service (EEAS) to continue promoting joint cooperation initiatives in strategic areas such as energy infrastructure, in particular the hydropower sector, sustainable development and culture, while also building on the positive experiences of the Member States already active in the region; 8. Highlights the importance of enhancing cooperation on critical raw materials, which have been identified as strategically important for ensuring secure, sustainable and diversified supply chains; takes note of the endorsement of the EU-Central Asia Joint Declaration of Intent on Critical Raw Materials at the first EU-Central Asia summit, and of Kyrgyzstan’s proposal to establish a partnership with the EU for the development of critical raw materials; 9. Notes that the Erasmus+ programme has been instrumental in facilitating academic exchanges; welcomes the EU’s support for digitalisation and education in the country, and calls for the creation of a programme for the exchange of entrepreneurs in the field of digital transformation and the green transition; stresses the importance of fostering convergence and coordinated reforms in higher education, such as by aligning the Kyrgyz National Qualifications Framework with the European Qualifications Framework; highlights the need to foster academic and cultural exchanges between Kyrgyzstan and the EU Member States and the active involvement of Kyrgyz young people in non-formal education and civil society programmes; underlines the importance of strengthening academic and vocational exchanges, building on the 2024 education agreement; 10. Strongly condemns the Kyrgyz authorities’ decision to abolish its independent torture prevention monitoring body, the National Centre for the Prevention of Torture, without public consultation or transparency, and to merge it with the Ombudsman’s office, terminating its independence welcomes the statement by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights expressing grave concerns in this regard and its call to the Kyrgyz authorities to halt this course of action; urges the authorities to fully ratify and implement the Rome Statute; 11. Recalls that the EU has already allocated EUR 12 million to support the reform of Kyrgyzstan’s judicial system, confirming the EU’s commitment to the country’s institutional development; stresses the importance of continuing to invest in institution building, transparency and the independence of the judiciary; 12. Expresses its concern, in view of the widespread corruption in Kyrgyzstan, about the transparent and efficient use of the EUR 98 million in EU assistance for the 2021-2027 period; calls on the Kyrgyz authorities to publish detailed reports on the use of EU funds and to strengthen cooperation with international anti-fraud bodies, such as the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF), in order to uphold global fund management standards and implement robust anti-fraud measures that protect the EU’s financial interests; calls on the Commission and other relevant EU institutions to ensure the highest possible level of oversight of the use of EU funds and to consider allocating additional resources to strengthen the financial and operational capacity of Kyrgyz agencies involved in their management; 13. Stresses the importance of enhanced information exchange on terrorist threats, full compliance with international counterterrorism financing standards and the implementation of robust measures to prevent the acquisition, transfer and use of chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear materials for terrorist purposes; 14. Underlines the importance of engaging all relevant stakeholders, facilitating cooperation between competent agencies and bringing national laws in line with international transparency standards in order to investigate financial crimes and promote good corporate governance; urges the Kyrgyz authorities to step up their efforts in eradicating corruption and not to use the fight against it as an excuse for cracking down on civil society and government critics; 15. Calls on the Kyrgyz Republic to review its technical regulations and strengthen collaboration on standards, metrology, market surveillance, accreditation and conformity assessment procedures to facilitate mutual market access, deepen bilateral trade with the EU and ensure fair treatment of investors; urges Kyrgyzstan to avoid restrictive measures that could disadvantage EU investors; Regional cooperation and global challenges 16. Considers Central Asia to be a region of strategic interest for the EU in terms of security, connectivity, energy diversification, conflict resolution and the defence of the multilateral, rules-based international order, especially in a historical moment marked by profound geopolitical change; encourages the EU to intensify its engagement with Central Asia on political, economic and security matters in line with the values of democracy, human rights and the rule of law that underpin EU external action; highlights that any further EU cooperation with Central Asian countries cannot be achieved at the expense of these values; emphasises the need for increased dialogue and collaboration on foreign and security policy issues, including cybersecurity, regional stability, crisis management, disarmament and arms control, in line with the principles of international law and the UN Charter; 17. Underlines that the EU and Central Asia are facing profound global and regional geopolitical shifts and challenges; stresses, in this regard, the need to work towards long-term, structured and mutually beneficial cooperation on matters of common interest; strongly encourages the EU to intensify its engagement with Central Asia, given the region’s geostrategic importance, and to promote a strategic partnership with Central Asian countries by expanding cooperation at political and economic level; welcomes the increased high-level contact between the EU and Central Asia; 18. Highlights the growing momentous challenges to multilateralism and a rules-based order for both the EU and the Kyrgyz Republic, such as Russia’s illegal war of aggression against Ukraine; notes, with concern, the neutral stance of Kyrgyzstan and other countries in the region towards the conflict, and encourages the Kyrgyz authorities to uphold international norms and contribute to regional efforts to safeguard sovereignty and territorial integrity; notes Russia’s influence in the region despite efforts by Central Asian countries to diversify their foreign relations; regrets that Kyrgyzstan has not condemned Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine; 19. Deeply regrets the decision of the Kyrgyz authorities to participate in the Russian-Belarusian Zapad 2025 military exercise near the EU border and views this action as incompatible with their stated intentions to build a closer partnership with the EU; 20. Deplores the active role of Kyrgyz companies and banks, such as Keremet Bank, in helping Russia to evade sanctions and obtain technology and dual-use goods for its war effort against Ukraine; deplores the recent attempt by Bakai Bank OJSC to file a strategic lawsuit against public participation against the Open Dialogue Foundation; urges the Kyrgyz authorities to take further measures to stop the transit of sanctioned goods to Russia through Kyrgyz territory, such as enforcing stricter licensing requirements and conducting due diligence on companies involved in the trade of dual-use goods; highlights that failure to address the export of dual-use technologies could lead to secondary sanctions; calls on the Commission to assess the current level of sanctions evasion by Russia with the help of actors in Central Asian countries, and to propose concrete solutions for addressing this; recommends the establishment of a working group focused on monitoring and tracking the trade of dual-use goods; 21. Regrets that, despite its stated commitment to respect democratic principles, the rule of law, human rights and fundamental freedoms, as agreed in the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement with the EU, Kyrgyzstan does not align its positions with those of democratic countries, in particular the EU Member States, when voting at the UN General Assembly; 22. Deplores the fact that the Turkish Cypriot secessionist entity was granted observer status by the Organization of Turkic States (OTS) and was present at the OTS summit in Bishkek; reiterates that, as part of the Joint Declaration following the first EU-Central Asia summit in Samarkand, the Central Asian states, including the Kyrgyz Republic, are committed to the relevant UN Security Council Resolutions – 541 (1983) and 550 (1984); 23. Recognises the need to strengthen relations to foster deeper, closer and values-based cooperation in facing common threats and achieving shared goals worldwide; 24. Welcomes initiatives aimed at strengthening the Trans-Caspian Transport Corridor and takes note of the Coordination Platform for the Corridor; 25. Highlights the EU’s role as an important donor of aid to the region; stresses the need to increase the EU’s efforts in its support for development cooperation in Central Asia, in particular in Kyrgyzstan under the newly signed EPCA; 26. Welcomes the border agreement reached between Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan and its recent ratification; urges both parties to take the necessary steps to implement the agreement, including by triggering consultations with the local populations, and to adopt measures to strengthen cross-border cooperation and support the border communities that have been hit hardest by the recent cross-border conflict; welcomes the EU’s financial support for the construction of facilities in the Sughd region of Tajikistan, which borders Kyrgyzstan; calls on the Kyrgyz authorities to investigate the serious crimes, documented by independent observers, that took place during the September 2022 armed conflict and to hold those responsible to account; 27. Welcomes the first trilateral summit bringing together Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan without mediation by external actors; welcomes Central Asian aspirations to strengthen their regional ties and set up a horizontal cooperation architecture in the region without the assertive involvement of external powers; Human rights, democracy and the rule of law 28. Stresses that respect for human rights, democracy and the rule of law strengthens stability, sustainable development and security, as they establish legal certainty, predictability and strong institutions; recalls that strong democratic legal frameworks and institutions foster innovation, trade, investments and economic expansion, while ensuring inclusive development and equal access to social and economic rights, and reducing social inequalities, and are indispensable in building resilient societies capable of resisting authoritarian influence and external destabilisation; 29. Encourages Kyrgyzstan to enact comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation that includes sexual orientation, gender, disability and ethnicity as protected categories; stresses that the protection of minorities in Kyrgyzstan requires a multifaceted strategy that addresses the root causes of discrimination, including existing obstacles in accessing justice; 30. Welcomes the legislative acts to enhance protection against domestic, sexual and gender-based violence; calls on the Kyrgyz Government to ensure that the law is consistently enforced and perpetrators are formally charged with the relevant crimes, and to maintain efforts towards eliminating gender-based and domestic violence; 31. Is concerned about the entry into force of new legislation restricting freedom of religion or belief in Kyrgyzstan, as it increases state surveillance and control over religious groups by creating a state registry for religious entities and buildings, introduces fines for wearing certain religious attire, such as the niqab, in state institutions and public places, and increases oversight of religious education; calls on the Kyrgyz authorities to ensure freedom of religion or belief is protected in the country, in line with international human rights standards and commitments under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; 32. Encourages the Kyrgyz Government to develop a national action plan for human rights with the involvement of civil society, in line with the recommendations made by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights; 33. Calls on the Kyrgyz Government to unconditionally release all wrongfully imprisoned or detained journalists, bloggers and activists, including Kanyshai Mamyrkulova and those affiliated with Temirov Live, such as Makhabat Tajibek kyzy, and Aike Beishekeyeva and Aktilek Kaparov, and to drop all charges against them, as well as to restore Bolot Temirov’s citizenship and refrain from other unlawful practices, including attempts to remove Temirov’s child from the family and place him under state care, and to make all efforts to reunite Temirov with his child in accordance with the child’s best interests; condemns the sentencing in October 2024 of journalists Azamat Ishenbekov and Makhabat Tajibek kyzy, from the Temirov Live platform known for its investigations into corruption, to five and six years in prison respectively; highlights the opinion of the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention recognising the detention of Temirov Live’s journalists as arbitrary; welcomes the pardoning of journalist and Temirov Live employee Azamat Ishenbekov, and of activist Zarina Torokulova, who were convicted on charges of ‘inciting mass unrest’; calls on the Kyrgyz Government to fully implement the recommendations of the UN Working Group made in Opinion No 57/2024; 34. Urges the Kyrgyz Government to ensure adherence to the principles of free and fair elections by safeguarding the rights to contest and campaign, while maintaining administrative neutrality towards all political parties throughout the current election cycle, in line with international standards; strongly condemns the Kyrgyz Government’s campaign of intimidation and legal persecution against opposition parties, particularly the SDK, which was removed by the Kyrgyz authorities from the November 2024 local elections in Bishkek; notes that discussions on electoral reform have taken place in the Kyrgyz Parliament; is extremely concerned by the consequences of the Kyrgyz Parliament legislation banning individuals with criminal records from holding key state offices, including candidacy for president and for member of parliament, as this may be selectively applied to bar political opponents and civil society figures from public life; 35. Strongly deplores the detention of Temirlan Sultanbekov, Irina Karamushkina and Roza Turksever on 13 November 2024, and calls on the Kyrgyz Government to urgently end their politically motivated prosecution by dropping all restrictions imposed on their respective sentences; condemns the fact that the proceedings against them have been marred by dubious practices, a lack of legal protections since the start and the violation of their right to due process; recalls that an audio recording of unknown origin, serving as the primary evidence and lacking judicial authorisation, is what initiated the investigation; laments that their trials have been held in a closed-door format without any audio or video recordings; denounces the fact that the conditions for their release on probation are disproportionate and violate their right to participate in public affairs; 36. Urges the Kyrgyz Government to refrain from pursuing politically motivated prosecutions or exerting undue pressure on political opposition and dissenting voices, such as the SDK; emphasises that political pluralism is a necessary component of any modern democracy and must be respected to maintain long-term legitimacy and stability; 37. Urges the Kyrgyz authorities to ensure the right to peaceful assembly by lifting the ban on protests in Bishkek city centre, which was initiated in response to a request from the Russian embassy to end anti-war protests outside its premises in 2022; 38. Welcomes the acquittal of Klara Sooronkulova, Gulnara Dzhurabayeva, Asya Sasykbayeva and other members of the Committee for the Protection of the Kempir-Abad Water Reservoir; urges the Kyrgyz Government to drop its appeal of the decision of the court of first instance, and bring the politically motivated prosecution to an end; 39. Strongly condemns, and urges the Kyrgyz authorities to end, the ongoing and increasing crackdown on civil society and the efforts by Kyrgyz authorities to suppress independent media and limit public dissent through a combination of legal, administrative and coercive measures; calls on the authorities to foster an environment of cooperation, with the involvement of civil society and local communities in public consultations and decision-making processes; deplores, in particular, the politically motivated detention of human rights activist Rita Karasartova, who has been in pre-trial detention since April 2025 with no investigative actions taken, thus violating procedural norms, and whose case has been classified by the authorities, hence barring her defence from obtaining a copy of the evidence file and implying that her trial, scheduled for August 2025 after two prior postponements, will take place behind closed doors, and calls for her urgent release; deplores the disproportionate sentence against the human rights activist Kanyshai Mamyrkulova, who has been sentenced to four years on probation with a curfew, a prohibition on leaving the country and with restrictions and surveillance on her online publications, for a social media post critical of the Kyrgyz Government; further deplores the probation sentence given to Joomart Karabaev, a linguist and former expert at the National Academy of Sciences, for ‘inciting unrest’ through social media posts criticising judicial corruption; expresses its admiration for Kyrgyz civil society and independent media which, despite the persecution and at great personal risk, remains one of the most vibrant civil societies in Central Asia; 40. Calls on the EU Member States and the EU institutions to support Kyrgyz civil society organisations, human rights defenders and lawyers, LGBTIQ+ and environmental activists, independent media and bloggers, to express their grave concern over the deterioration of human rights in the country in all their exchanges with the authorities of Kyrgyzstan, and to reassess the country’s GSP+ benefits and adopt appropriate measures, including sanctions under the EU’s global human rights sanctions regime (‘EU Magnitsky Act’) as a last resort, if Kyrgyzstan continues to disregard its commitments to international conventions; 41. Deplores several recent cases of individuals critical of the Kyrgyz Government living outside of Kyrgyzstan facing the threat of extradition to Kyrgyzstan, where they risk politically motivated arrest, imprisonment and torture in retaliation for their criticism; denounces the case of exiled activist Tilekmat Kurenov who was recently extradited from the United Arab Emirates to Kyrgyzstan, where he had previously been subjected to politically motivated imprisonment, torture and threats because of his activism; 42. Urges the Kyrgyz Government to revoke the Russian-style ‘foreign representatives’ law, which severely impairs the ability of civil society to carry out legitimate public interest work and operate without undue interference and harassment while ensuring a safe working environment, and which contradicts Kyrgyzstan’s international obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and its commitments as an EU partner under the EPCA; urges the Commission to ensure that the EU’s programmes and initiatives are not compromised by the proposed laws, which may limit freedom of expression and curtail the activities of non-governmental organisations; 43. Urges Kyrgyzstan to respect and protect media freedom and pluralism, which are fundamental conditions for democracy, refraining from forcibly closing independent media outlets, as in the case of Kloop, or levelling unsubstantiated allegations against them due to their investigative and critical reporting; strongly condemns the recent crackdown on Kloop and calls for the unconditional release of the remaining journalists affiliated with Kloop – Aleksandr Aleksandrov and Zhoomart Duulatov – and for a stop to prosecutions and harassments of their staff; welcomes the condemnation by human rights organisations such as Amnesty International and the Media Action Platform of the crackdown as part of a broader attempt to dismantle independent journalism in the country; calls on the Kyrgyz authorities to allow independent media professionals to carry out their work, to guarantee journalists and reporters will not face retaliatory persecution for their professional activities, including investigative journalism, and to provide adequate protection to reporters that might be harassed for their reporting; calls on the Commission and the EU Member States to ensure the continued operation of the Kyrgyz Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty service; 44. Calls on the EEAS and the EU Delegation in Kyrgyzstan to conduct active public diplomacy and address false narratives spread by the Kyrgyz authorities, in particular those that misrepresent EU values and policies with the aim of discrediting independent media and civil society; urges EU and Member State diplomats in Kyrgyzstan to attend politically motivated trials and to provide support to the unjustly persecuted individuals and their families; 45. Condemns the Kyrgyz authorities’ attempts to shut down Aprel TV by revoking its broadcasting license and terminating its social media operations on the basis of an investigation by Kyrgyzstan’s State Committee for National Security; deplores the 9 July 2025 ruling of the Bishkek October District Court, which ordered the channel’s liquidation and the removal of its social media pages, effectively closing down the outlet; laments these actions in a context of shuttering media outlets on illegitimate grounds; 46. Expresses concern about the re-criminalisation of libel and insult laws and calls on the Kyrgyz Government not to abuse these provisions to target journalists and legitimate political opposition; invites the authorities to review this legislation in accordance with the Venice Commission’s recommendations; expresses further concern about the draft bill on the amendment of the Criminal Code proposed by the presidential administration, particularly the changes to Article 18 that defines what a crime is, as it introduces a worrying wording that could lead to legal abuse by removing liability and justifying illegal actions by officials, law enforcement and State Committee for National Security (GKNB) operatives; 47. Urges the Kyrgyz authorities to revoke the law on ‘false information’ and the law prohibiting ‘LGBT propaganda’, which contravene Kyrgyzstan’s obligations under international law and have been systematically used to silence critical voices, including journalists and civil society actors; strongly regrets the final approval of the controversial Law on Mass Media, which media experts and civil society members warn would introduce repressive media control and calls on the Kyrgyz authorities to ensure that the mass media law is fully in line with international standards and does not result in violations of the freedoms of media or expression; 48. Calls on the Kyrgyz Government to protect journalists, non-governmental organisation workers and activists from intimidation and harassment, including those facing death threats and other threats to their safety while in prison, and calls on the EU Delegation to closely monitor such threats and report regularly on the situation of at-risk individuals; deplores the government raids, blocking of news sites and prosecution of journalists and bloggers; condemns the court’s closure of the organisation behind the Kloop investigative platform over its alleged ‘negative’ coverage; regrets President Japarov’s call for the Kyrgyz Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty to be shut down, accusing the Kyrgyz service of spreading misinformation; 49. Urges the Kyrgyz Government to refrain from criminalising the possession of ‘extremist’ materials, as human rights watchdogs have warned that this could lead to the further deterioration of freedom of speech in Kyrgyzstan, given the potential for abuse of the law, and to maintain clear legal safeguards to prevent the misuse of laws that penalise public incitements of extremist activity; urges Kyrgyzstan’s Supreme Council to uphold the right to freedom of expression and recalls that countering ‘false information’ cannot lead to a crackdown on independent media, the opposition and others critical of the government; 50. Urges the Kyrgyz Government to strengthen the rule of law, separation of powers and the independence of the judiciary in line with international standards, to establish processes to measure judicial performance, improve public oversight and increase transparency within the judiciary, and to enhance the engagement of the judiciary with civil society and other branches of government; calls on the Kyrgyz authorities to step up their efforts in guaranteeing equal access to justice, the right to a fair trial and the fulfilment of the right to due process; 51. Is concerned by the high number of pre-trial detention cases, which has been highlighted by the Kyrgyz Ombudsperson Dzhamilia Dzhamanbaeva, and echoes the Ombudsperson’s call on Kyrgyz law enforcement and judiciary bodies to adhere to international standards, including the UN Standard Minimum Rules for Non-Custodial Measures; 52. Notes the penitentiary system reforms carried out in recent years, mainly comprising the development of probation, the digitalisation of different processes and the introduction of alternative preventive measures; regrets, however, cases of mistreatment of prisoners and encourages the Kyrgyz authorities to take all necessary steps to ensure that prisoners do not experience inhuman or degrading treatment or conditions, and receive adequate healthcare in safe and secure conditions; 53. Underlines the need to develop new legislation in the field of administrative law and justice, including the reform of public administration and alternative dispute resolution, and to strengthen the professional capacities of public administration and judiciary representatives, which could be partly achieved by adopting e-governance systems; 54. Asks the Kyrgyz authorities to uphold the independence of the legal profession and ensure that lawyers are not subjected to interference or harassment as a result of fulfilling their professional duties, including the defence of their clients in politically sensitive cases; 55. Commends Kyrgyzstan’s participation in the Central Asia Rule of Law Programme, which supported national efforts to prevent and fight corruption and money laundering, and raised awareness about human rights standards among legal professionals, among other matters; 56. Notes the return of the controversial Land Code to the Kyrgyz Parliament by President Japarov, following public protests against it; o 57. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of the Kyrgyz Republic.
| ||||||||||||||||||
| Partial renewal of Members of the Court of Auditors – LU nominee |
| ||||||
(Consultation) The European Parliament, – having regard to Article 286(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C10‑0109/2025), – having regard to Rule 133 of its Rules of Procedure, – having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A10-0148/2025), A. whereas, by letter of 2 June 2025, the Council consulted Parliament on the nomination of Joëlle Elvinger as a Member of the Court of Auditors; B. whereas Parliament’s Committee on Budgetary Control then proceeded to evaluate Joëlle Elvinger’s credentials, in particular in view of the requirements laid down in Article 286(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union; whereas in carrying out that evaluation, the committee received a curriculum vitae from Joëlle Elvinger as well as the replies to the written questionnaire that she had been sent; C. whereas the committee subsequently held a hearing with Joëlle Elvinger on 15 July 2025, at which she made an opening statement and then answered questions put by the members of the committee; 1. Delivers a favourable opinion on the Council’s nomination of Joëlle Elvinger as a Member of the Court of Auditors; 2. Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council and, for information, to the Court of Auditors, the other institutions of the European Union and the audit institutions of the Member States. | |||||||
| Partial renewal of Members of the Court of Auditors – NL nominee |
| ||||||
(Consultation) The European Parliament, – having regard to Article 286(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C10‑0108/2025), – having regard to Rule 133 of its Rules of Procedure, – having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A10-0149/2025), A. whereas, by letter of 2 June 2025, the Council consulted Parliament on the nomination of Stef Blok as a Member of the Court of Auditors; B. whereas Parliament’s Committee on Budgetary Control then proceeded to evaluate Stef Blok’s credentials, in particular in view of the requirements laid down in Article 286(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union; whereas in carrying out that evaluation, the committee received a curriculum vitae from Stef Blok, as well as the replies to the written questionnaire that he had been sent; C. whereas the committee subsequently held a hearing with Stef Blok on 15 July 2025, at which he made an opening statement and then answered questions put by the members of the committee; 1. Delivers a favourable opinion on the Council’s nomination of Stef Blok as a Member of the Court of Auditors; 2. Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council and, for information, to the Court of Auditors, the other institutions of the European Union and the audit institutions of the Member States. | |||||||
| Public procurement |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The European Parliament, – having regard to the Treaty on European Union, in particular Article 3(3) thereof, – having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, in particular Articles 114, 151 and 156 thereof, – having regard to Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC(1), – having regard to Directive 2014/25/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on procurement by entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors and repealing Directive 2004/17/EC(2), – having regard to Directive 2007/66/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2007 amending Council Directives 89/665/EEC and 92/13/EEC with regard to improving the effectiveness of review procedures concerning the award of public contracts(3) (Remedies Directive), – having regard to Regulation (EU) 2022/1031 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 June 2022 on the access of third-country economic operators, goods and services to the Union’s public procurement and concession markets and procedures supporting negotiations on access of Union economic operators, goods and services to the public procurement and concession markets of third countries (International Procurement Instrument – IPI)(4), – having regard to Directive (EU) 2019/882 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2019 on the accessibility requirements for products and services (the European Accessibility Act)(5) and Directive (EU) 2016/2102 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 October 2016 on the accessibility of the websites and mobile applications of public sector bodies (the Web Accessibility Directive)(6), – having regard to the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) of 30 January 2020 in Case C-395/18, Tim SpA – Direzione e coordinamento Vivendi SA v Consip SpA, Ministero dell’Economia e delle Finanze(7), – having regard to the recent judgments of the CJEU on the participation of foreign bidders in EU public procurement procedures, namely the judgments of 22 October 2024 in Case C-652/22, Kolin Inşaat Turizm Sanayi ve Ticaret AȘ v Državna komisija za kontrolu postupaka javne nabave(8) and of 13 March 2025 in Case C-266/22, CRRC Qingdao Sifang Co. Ltd, Astra Vagoane Călători SA v Autoritatea pentru Reformă Feroviară, Alstom Ferroviaria SpA(9), – having regard to the World Trade Organization’s Agreement on Government Procurement 2012, – having regard to the Commission work programme 2025 of 11 February 2025 entitled ‘Moving forward together: A Bolder, Simpler, Faster Union’ (COM(2025)0045), – having regard to the Commission communication of 26 February 2025 entitled ‘The Clean Industrial Deal: A joint roadmap for competitiveness and decarbonisation’ (COM(2025)0085), – having regard to the Commission communication of 29 January 2025 entitled ‘A Competitiveness Compass for the EU’ (COM(2025)0030), – having regard to the Commission communication of 19 June 2024 entitled ‘2024 European Semester – Spring Package’ (COM(2024)0600), – having regard to the Commission report entitled ‘SME needs analysis in Public Procurement’ (2021)(10), – having regard to the Commission communication of 9 December 2021 entitled ‘Building an economy that works for people: an action plan for the social economy’ (COM(2021)0778), – having regard to International Labour Organization convention C94 of 1949 on Labour Clauses (Public Contracts), – having regard to the Commission communication of 3 October 2017 entitled ‘Making Public Procurement work in and for Europe’ (COM(2017)0572), – having regard to the opinion of the European Committee of the Regions of 4 December 2024 entitled ‘Shock-proofing European regions: Strengthening local and regional economic resilience in the strategic evolution of the Single Market’(11), – having regard to the European Court of Auditors’ Special report 28/2023 of 4 December 2023 entitled ‘Public procurement in the EU. Less competition for contracts awarded for works, goods and services in the 10 years up to 2021’ (ECA Special Report), – having regard to the Council conclusions of 24 May 2024 on the European Court of Auditors’ Special Report 28/2023 entitled ‘Improve a fair and effective competition for EU public procurement contracts awarded for works, goods, and services’(12), – having regard to its resolution of 16 December 2020 on a new strategy for European SMEs(13), – having regard to its resolution of 13 July 2023 on the state of the SME Union(14), – having regard to the Commission report of 20 May 2021 entitled ‘Implementation and best practices of national procurement policies in the Internal Market’ (COM(2021)0245), – having regard to the Parliament study of 24 October 2023 entitled ‘The social impact of public procurement – Can the EU do more?’(15), – having regard to the European Labour Authority report of May 2024 ‘Evaluating policy responses to prevent undeclared work in public procurement contracts’, – having regard to the reports by Mario Draghi of 9 September 2024 entitled ‘The future of European competitiveness’ (Draghi report) and by Enrico Letta of 17 April 2024 entitled ‘Much more than a market’ (Letta report), – having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure, – having regard to the opinions of the Committee on International Trade and the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, – having regard to the report of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection (A10-0147/2025), A. whereas public procurement represents approximately 14 % of the EU’s gross domestic product and serves as an important instrument for economic growth, particularly for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), innovation, sustainability and social cohesion, as well as for promoting local industry and quality jobs in the EU and for supporting the transition towards resilient supply chains and business models, including in subcontracting chains; B. whereas local and regional governments, as the largest investors and contracting authorities in the EU, are increasingly constrained by stringent EU and national rules, complex legal requirements and procedures and disproportionate administrative burdens, while simultaneously facing a persistent shortage of financial resources, qualified personnel and technical expertise – particularly at the level of municipalities and smaller regions – which frequently necessitates the outsourcing of core tasks to external entities, thereby generating additional financial strain and procedural delays; C. whereas public procurement can drive spillover effects that increase the demand for sustainable goods and services across the whole market, as well as support the creation of a lead market; D. whereas the 2014 reform aimed to simplify procedures, enhance transparency and the fight against corruption, promote the participation of SMEs and innovative start-ups and integrate strategic procurement objectives through a voluntary approach, yet challenges remain in transparency, efficiency, the broader use and alignment of non-price criteria, access to data and streamlining enforcement, as well as the prevention of fraud and corruption; E. whereas the 2014 reform introduced the most economically advantageous tender (MEAT) criteria to incentivise the use of qualitative criteria such as environmental and social considerations in awarding public contracts; whereas the ECA Special Report noted that a large share of contracts were still being awarded on the sole basis of the lowest-price criterion in 2021; whereas 20 Member States awarded more than 50 % of their public tenders based on price alone in 2023, of which 10 Member States awarded more than 80 % of their public tenders based on price alone; F. whereas the ECA Special Report concluded that the level of competition for public contracts had decreased since 2014, and that in the majority of Member States the incidence of this award criterion based on lowest price had even increased over the period under review; G. whereas the EU procurement thresholds for supplies, services and construction works have remained virtually unchanged since 1994; whereas these thresholds, which are adjusted to market prices, are continuously decreasing in real terms; whereas, as a result, an increasing number of smaller contracts must now be tendered at EU level through procedures that are often lengthy and complex; H. whereas the European Labour Authority (ELA) found that ‘when the lowest price is used as the only selection criteria, the risk of undeclared work increases due to the pressure on labour costs’; whereas the ELA also noted that ‘It is widely acknowledged that prioritising the lowest price criterion in public procurement may create an environment where labour law violations are more likely to occur due to cost-cutting pressures and inadequate oversight; the lowest price criterion may incentivise contractors to operate in the undeclared economy to reduce costs, and bypassing labour regulations’; I. whereas the Commission’s final report entitled ‘SME needs analysis in public procurement’(16) points out that public procurement practices still need to be clarified, simplified and standardised, while taking into account the specificities and differing administrative systems of the Member States; J. whereas direct cross-border procurements remain limited to just 5 %(17) of all procurement contracts, indicating that barriers to cross-border competition and market access and complex procedures persist; whereas this figure does not take into account the participation of other Member State subsidiaries in the country where the procurement procedure takes place; K. whereas the Commission highlights several legal uncertainties in promoting socially responsible and innovative public procurement(18); whereas these legal uncertainties include, among others, difficulties in connecting social considerations to the subject matter of a contract; L. whereas the Commission President has committed to a revision of the public procurement framework with a view to enabling ‘preference to be given to European products in public procurement for certain strategic sectors’(19); M. whereas the revision of public procurement directives should focus on encouraging qualitative criteria, streamlining procurement procedures and ensuring best value for taxpayers’ money; whereas, nevertheless, public procurement rules must take into account the specific nature of different sectors and industries and the specific goals of contracting authorities, recognising that a uniform approach to regulatory measures, such as payment terms, may not be suitable for all sectors, and that tailored provisions in sector-specific regulations are necessary to ensure that the overall procurement frameworks align with industry-specific operational and financial realities; whereas winning tenders should be chosen in accordance with what the individual contracting authority considers to be the economically best solution among those submitted in order to encourage greater quality orientation and flexibility in public procurement; N. whereas public procurement remains a neutral and procedural tool, regulating how public authorities buy goods and services, and not what they buy; O. whereas considering the challenges related to European industrial sovereignty and the need to preserve and strengthen European jobs and know-how, public procurement should be used as a major strategic lever to promote the creation of added value within the EU, thereby enhancing industrial resilience and the sustainability of European supply chains; P. whereas contracting authorities in the EU should be allowed to give preference to bids that include a significant proportion of added value produced within the EU; Q. whereas the use of sustainability criteria can contribute to achieving the EU’s environmental goals, provided that such criteria are clearly defined, proportionate, and do not restrict contracting authorities in meeting their actual procurement needs; R. whereas contracting authorities operate in diverse local and market contexts and must retain the freedom to define the subject, scope and strategic priorities of procurement in line with their actual needs and capacities; whereas the principle of proportionality and subsidiarity must be safeguarded in any EU-level approach to sustainable procurement; S. whereas it is necessary to bolster trust in public procurement; whereas a lack of transparency and fairness in procurement procedures, including concerns over favouritism, unclear selection criteria, insufficient oversight mechanisms and insufficient exclusion and sanctioning, undermines trust in public contracting and creates opportunities for corruption; whereas the over-reliance on the lowest price criterion may in some cases exert downward pressure on the quality of services and safety and working conditions and may have a detrimental long-term economic impact on procuring authorities; whereas there have been cases of contracts being awarded in the absence of actual competition and with opacity and a lack of effective external control in the selection criteria, highlighting the urgent need to strengthen the principles of transparency, equality and legality at all stages of public procurement procedures; T. whereas European businesses, particularly SMEs, encounter significant difficulties in accessing international public procurement markets due to protectionist policies in non-EU countries, while the EU maintains one of the most open procurement markets globally, leading to unfair competitive disadvantages for EU companies; whereas, in addition to protectionist policies, fair competition is often distorted by product subsidisation on the part of governments of non-EU countries, discriminatory measures and a lack of reciprocity and legal certainty; U. whereas the EU has recently added the International Procurement Instrument and Foreign Subsidies Regulation(20) to its trade defence toolbox to promote reciprocity in access to international public procurement markets and to ensure a level playing field for EU companies and products; whereas environmental, social, labour and due diligence requirements would apply to the economic operators of non-EU countries in accordance with Directives 2014/23/EU(21), 2014/24/EU, 2014/25/EU and (EU) 2024/1760(22) and other EU legislation; V. whereas the World Trade Organization (WTO) Agreement on Government Procurement 2012 has not yet been signed by all WTO members and its latest version does not include, among other things, the global labour and environmental standards adopted since its conclusion, nor an updated inflation adjustment mechanism; W. whereas the CJEU judgments on the participation of foreign bidders in EU public procurement procedures (Case C-652/22 and C-266/22) clarify that foreign bidders from countries that have not concluded a multilateral, plurilateral or bilateral agreement do not have secured access to the EU procurement market; whereas the CJEU reaffirmed the EU’s exclusive competence in this area and confirmed that in the absence of such agreements, contracting authorities may, in accordance with EU law, limit or exclude these bidders – a situation that may lead to divergent national practices; X. whereas an increase in geopolitical tensions is leading to a reshuffle in international trade and new economic dynamics, resulting in the emergence of new strategic dependencies driven by import concentration and limited import substitutability, and poses risks to the stability of supply chains; whereas this requires the enhanced and strategic use of public procurement in supporting the EU’s economy and its capacity for resilience, reducing harmful dependencies and strengthening its strategic autonomy; Y. whereas public procurement policies should promote European competitiveness and innovation; Z. whereas the lowest price is an important award criterion in most tenders in the EU – in some Member States it is applied in up to 95 %(23) of cases or is sometimes even the sole criterion in both the tender and award stages of a procurement procedure; whereas the ELA, in its May 2024 report, observes that reliance on the lowest‑price criterion – particularly in labour‑intensive sectors where staff costs dominate – can exacerbate the occurrence of undeclared work and may undermine service or product quality, sustainability and social standards;(24) whereas SME representatives and people interviewed from SMEs repeatedly report that contracting authorities ignore the horizontal social clause, noting that they award contracts solely on the basis of the lowest price, which encourages abnormally low bids and discourages the participation of bidders that comply with labour laws and practices; AA. whereas the CJEU judgment in Case C-395/18 confirms that the requirements in Article 18(2) of Directive 2014/24/EU laying down that economic operators must comply, in the performance of public contracts, with obligations relating to environmental, social and labour law, constitute a binding principle, in the same way as the other principles referred to in paragraph 1 of that article, namely equal treatment, non-discrimination, transparency and proportionality; whereas the judgment also clarifies that Member States may take into account violations by subcontractors when determining grounds for exclusion, provided that the principle of proportionality is strictly respected; AB. whereas public procurement represents a key tool to actively support the transition to a sustainable, inclusive and fair economy and can be used to promote social justice and decent working conditions; whereas contracting authorities should be encouraged to pursue public interest objectives through procurement, including social inclusion, quality jobs, equal opportunities, territorial cohesion and support for social economy actors; AC. whereas unlocking the full potential of strategic public procurement requires shifting from a purely cost-based approach to one that also considers resilience and social and environmental value, including through respect for collective bargaining and fundamental labour rights; AD. whereas subcontracting is crucial for fair competition for SMEs and their ability to rely on specialised expertise; whereas it can also enhance efficiency, innovation and SME participation in public procurement; whereas, due to legal ambiguities and weak enforcement, multiple layers of subcontracting may dilute accountability, increase risks of labour law violations and hinder effective enforcement; AE. whereas the increasing digitalisation of procurement processes must be accompanied by robust cybersecurity measures, interoperability prerequisites and easy-to-use and harmonised digital platforms for procurement submissions, and ensure transparency and machine readability for analytical purposes; whereas digitalisation can, furthermore, contribute to simplifying access for businesses, particularly micro, small, and medium-sized enterprises, to public procurement, as well as reduce the bureaucratic burden for smaller contracting authorities; AF. whereas rather than adopting a ‘European only’ stance, the EU should focus on the best possible quality, while taking into account a wide range of conditions, including price, safety, quality, sustainability, resilience and labour conditions; whereas it should also focus on the promotion of partnerships with its democratic allies; AG. whereas despite the objective of the 2014 reform, efforts to promote the essential participation of SMEs in public procurement, their involvement remains limited because of large contract sizes, disproportionate administrative requirements, a lack of tailored support mechanisms that would enable them to compete effectively with larger entities, a lack of clarity in tender notices and recurring payment delays; AH. whereas procurement strategies can promote an economic environment conducive to local growth, enhancing community wealth, job creation and long-term financial stability, thereby strengthening to the greatest extent possible the role of SMEs, including start-ups and social economy organisations, in public tenders; AI. whereas Article 27 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities establishes the principle of equal employment opportunities in accessible and inclusive labour markets; whereas Directive 2014/24/EU on public procurement enables the incorporation of social criteria in contract awards, including measures that support inclusive employment and address social exclusion; whereas the EU strategy for the rights of persons with disabilities 2021-2030 acknowledges reserved contracts under Directive 2014/24/EU as one tool among others for ensuring accessibility standards; AJ. whereas applying the MEAT criteria, taking into account product life cycle and environmental impact, may support rational and long-term public procurement decisions; AK. whereas the transposition of European public procurement rules into national law is sometimes ineffective, leading to inconsistencies in implementation, legal uncertainty and barriers to access for economic operators; whereas, to prevent these implementation gaps and ensure consistent application, detailed guidance frameworks should be established to assist Member States in effectively transposing the rules; AL. whereas systematic registers of contract performance can enhance the ability of contracting authorities to swiftly exclude unsuitable actors from procurement processes, including actors linked to criminal networks and foreign interference, prevent labour exploitation and enhance reliable contract performance; whereas the effective interoperability and cross-border accessibility of these registers across the Member States is important to strengthen transparency, safeguard public funds, support the internal market and reinforce the security and integrity of critical public infrastructure and services; Strategic objectives 1. Stresses that European public procurement should remain an essential pillar of a properly functioning internal market and broader economy, and that ambitious, targeted reform is needed to unlock its true potential, encourage production in the Member States and contribute to resilient, secure and strategic supply chains; stresses the need for the harmonised implementation of the current and the reformed legislative framework by the Member States; calls on the Commission to streamline and clarify the focus of public procurement goals, including those for strategic procurement, by establishing a more focused, economically viable, precise and non-conflicting set of objectives that are clear, measurable and capable of delivering tangible market impact; calls, therefore, for improved legal certainty and coherence in order to simplify the application of the rules by contracting authorities, emphasising that many procurement procedures are excessively lengthy, thereby delaying essential investment; adds that public procurement should bring value to the public in addition to contributing to balanced economic development across the EU; 2. Considers that global competition is increasingly shaped not only by market forces, but also by state-led industrial strategies, including foreign subsidies, overcapacity and discriminatory procurement practices, which threaten to undermine the competitiveness and resilience of European producers; stresses, in this context, the importance of reinforcing Europe’s strategic resilience and economic security by promoting the development of critical and nascent industries in key sectors; recognises the need to strengthen the single market and the EU’s strategic autonomy by introducing preference to European goods and services in targeted strategic sectors; supports exploring how public procurement can serve as a targeted tool to stimulate demand for innovative and sustainable European-made products and technologies, and to anchor industrial capacity within the EU; recognises, furthermore, the potential of EU-content or resilience criteria – if designed proportionately – to support long-term security of supply in sensitive areas; underlines, however, that any strategic orientation must remain anchored in legal certainty, transparency and fair competition, avoiding fragmentation of the internal market, distortion of international commitments or the alienation of strategic partners; 3. Acknowledges the Commission’s ongoing evaluation with regards to the revision of the legal frameworks for EU public procurement; highlights that the consultation process should include a regulatory impact assessment respecting free market principles and that its main objective should be delivering value through market-based solutions; calls, therefore, for showcasing the effect of potential new rules aimed at promoting the sustainable and social procurement objectives and measures necessary to ensure fair and effective competition, while at the same time achieving, to as great an extent as possible, the removal of excessive and unnecessary administrative barriers and streamlining regulatory provisions; highlights the importance for flexibility in determining the nature and inclusion of strategic considerations in public procurement procedures; 4. Calls, therefore, on the Commission to fully align the public procurement reform with its strategic objectives aimed at reducing bureaucracy and regulatory burdens, simplification, maintaining high social and environmental standards, guaranteeing ambitious local economic development, promoting access for SMEs and boosting the EU’s competitiveness and security, preventing social dumping and preserving our economic and industrial sovereignty, in order to address harmful dependencies in respect of certain vital products and services; advises against measures that could compromise any of these principles; 5. Recalls the consistent EU policy objectives reflected in various regulations, such as sustainability, labour standards, human rights, innovation, resilience and circularity, in the context of the upcoming reform; emphasises the need to tackle gold-plating, prevent the emergence of possible barriers during the upcoming reform, and to identify and overcome the main obstacles to sustainable and resilient procurement, guarantee security of supply and ensure fair and effective competition; 6. Recognises that, in order to make public procurement more accessible for smaller actors, including social economy organisations involved in public procurement, and particularly for SMEs and start-ups, updated versions of directives must aim at reducing the current 476 articles or 907 pages of law and must continue to be procedural in character, specifying how rather than what to buy; stresses, however, that sufficient flexibility should be maintained for contracting authorities to adapt procurement processes based on their specific needs, ensuring efficiency and the best value for money; 7. Notes that international competition is putting pressure on numerous industrial sectors in Europe through overcapacity and price dumping, and therefore expects that, in addition to promoting green and social initiatives, lead markets should also be anchored in public tenders in order to strengthen Europe’s strategic independence in key sectors, giving priority to European bidders within these sectors; 8. Emphasises that any revision should aim to strengthen the enforcement of future procurement laws and must address the complexity of the current rules and ensure legal certainty for contracting authorities; points out that procurement rules must respect the non-discrimination principle and provide clarity regarding the link to the subject matter, in line with the principles of legal certainty and obligations under the WTO Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA) and given the number of sector-specific laws; 9. Points to significant legal and administrative differences across the Member States and their procurement systems, ranging from varying degrees of autonomy for local authorities to differing procurement strategies; recognises the benefits of the directive format, which allows for such diversity while ensuring legal coherence and mutual respect for national systems; calls on the Commission to assess the most appropriate legal instrument in view of the forthcoming reform; 10. Reiterates that taxpayers’ money should be spent with utmost prudence and transparency so as to benefit citizens and, where economically feasible, support sustainable growth; considers that the revision of the directives should aim at completing the objectives set out in 2014 and adjusting to the new challenges Europe has to face; believes, therefore, that three guiding principles – value for money over the entire life cycle, fair competition and anti-corruption measures – remain valid in the context of the upcoming reform and should not be compromised; 11. Recognises, in this context, that while public procurement can be a useful tool for achieving strategic objectives, such as innovation and sustainability or supporting strategic industries in Europe that are essential to the security of industrial output and economic stability, it is an engine for fulfilling tasks whose primary function is to achieve the best value for public tax funds and thus ensure the efficient and transparent procurement of goods and services; 12. Urges the Commission, in the light of the economic slowdown and rising public debt, to carefully assess any legal changes that could further constrain the purchasing power of contracting authorities and limit available vendors, as such constraints could ultimately undermine citizens’ access to high-quality public services and infrastructure; underlines that due consideration must be given to the need for clear rules regarding the treatment of products and economic operators from non-EU countries; cautions, however, against the use of procurement for protectionist purposes; underlines, in this context, that European preference should be compliant with the EU’s WTO commitments; 13. Stresses that support measures should not distort the level playing field; reiterates the importance for European public procurement processes to remain as open as possible and insists that they must remain technologically neutral and competition-driven; highlights that long-term commercial viability should be a guiding principle when assessing technologies for public investment; Main challenges 14. Recognises that significant discrepancies remain between Member States in their implementation and enforcement of public procurement rules, discouraging cross-border bids and the participation of smaller businesses and social economy enterprises, which creates an uneven playing field; notes the varying degrees of implementation of green public procurement across the Member States, with only one third introducing binding obligations and the remainder opting for voluntary approaches; 15. Notes that, in the context of procuring goods and services and in accordance with the constitutional structures of the Member States – particularly the protection of regional and local self-government under Article 4(2) of the Treaty on European Union – local authorities have the discretion to determine how to fulfil their procurement needs; recalls that they may choose to supply goods in house, cooperate with other public entities, or engage with the market through procurement procedures; believes that the freedom and autonomy of public authorities should be safeguarded and respected; 16. Regrets that competition in public procurement has significantly declined over the past decade, as pointed out in the ECA Special Report, resulting in an increased number of tenders with a single bid or no bids; regrets, furthermore, that the same report finds that contracting authorities implement strategic procurement to a very limited extent and the share of procedures using award criteria other than price is very limited; recognises that the use of strategic public procurement has remained limited due to the lack of legal certainty in the interpretation of the requirement for ‘link to the subject matter of the contract’ provided for contracting authorities and their consequent fear of litigation; 17. Notes that procurement procedures have become increasingly complex and burdensome, creating unnecessary administrative hurdles that deter a diverse range of suppliers, including cross-border suppliers, from participating, as well as restricting competition and leading to delays in the delivery of essential public projects; stresses that these issues also affect public contracting authorities, particularly smaller local and regional governments; cautions that the ECA Special Report indicates that the length of administrative procedures has increased since 2021; notes, additionally, that the lack of an interoperable digital infrastructure for procurement platforms remains a barrier for businesses, particularly SMEs, contributing to inefficiencies and increasing costs; 18. Is concerned that transparency and enforcement in procurement remains inadequate, as evidenced by persistently low publication rates for contract awards, limited accessibility to procurement data and ongoing risks of abuses, fraud and corruption; recalls that favouritism, unclear or biased selection criteria and insufficient oversight mechanisms for enforcement and sanctions undermine trust in public contracting and fairness; stresses the need to establish obligations for publication and reinforced justification for all awards by negotiated procedure without a prior call for competition, in order to guarantee a minimum level of competition, traceability and control, avoiding abuse of legal exceptions; urges the Commission to make use of advanced digital tools and platforms to increase transparency and accountability in public procurement processes and deter corruption practices; 19. Notes that, at present, public contracting authorities already have the option to consider factors such as innovation, resilience, sustainability and social considerations via award, technical specification or contract performance clauses, on a voluntary basis and depending on their decision, as explicitly permitted by the 2014 directives; notes that in certain cases public contracts continue to be awarded primarily on the basis of a lowest price criterion, also owing to insufficient training and financial and human resources, restricting procurement authorities from considering additional factors such as innovation and quality-to-price ratio, which leads to suboptimal long-term outcomes that are misaligned with citizens’ interests; stresses that reliance on the lowest-price criterion limits the ability of contracting authorities to take into account operational costs and to apply life cycle costing; 20. Emphasises that the complexity, excessive qualification criteria and increasing bureaucratic burden of procurement processes disproportionately affect SMEs, local businesses and national contractors, dissuading them from participating and thereby reducing the diversity of bids and undermining sustainable and innovative procurement; observes that SMEs continue to face difficulties in public procurement, despite the establishment of national and European mechanisms, owing in particular to recurring payment delays in some Member States, a lack of clarity and accessibility in national and European tender notices, as well as a lack of transparency in the candidate selection procedures, which contributes to a perception of opacity in the processes; 21. Recalls that the Strategic Analysis Report of 2023 on the construction sector by the European Labour Authority and the Commission report on the application and implementation of Directive (EU) 2018/957 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 June 2018 amending Directive 96/71/EC concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services (COM(2024)0320) have determined that long and complex subcontracting chains can pose numerous challenges for labour enforcement authorities when they are used to escaping legal responsibilities and may lead to unclear accountability and difficulty in ensuring compliance with public procurement contracts and labour obligations; notes, in that context, that the directive does not provide contracting authorities with sufficient tools to effectively address the non-performance of public contracts, and in some cases even hampers authorities wishing to take proactive measures; Areas for improvement 22. Notes that there is currently a strong demand for updating public procurement thresholds in the light of the significant increase in inflation and construction costs in the EU; calls on the Commission to assess the possibilities for advocating an increase in the thresholds at international level and to introduce a mechanism taking into consideration inflation rates; points out that raising thresholds gives contracting authorities greater independence and possibilities to award contracts based on local needs; points out that excessively complicated procedures, which are characterised by a high degree of technical and legal complexity, together with administrative requirements that are sometimes disproportionate to the value of the contract, constitute one of the main problems in the public procurement sector and therefore the Commission’s efforts should go beyond merely negotiating threshold values; 23. Notes that while six different procurement procedures provide for flexibility, some of these are rarely employed, such as procedures for innovation partnerships, owing to their complexity and bureaucratic hurdles; believes that streamlining and aligning data reporting obligations for contracting authorities at national and EU level, as well as basic data interoperability requirements, has the potential to deliver added value; considers it essential that the Commission and the Member States systematically analyse procurement data in a comprehensive and structured manner in order to identify and address the underlying causes of declining competition and inefficiencies in procurement processes; 24. Advocates a clearer distinction between contracting authorities and public undertakings; underlines that the freedom and autonomy of public authorities must always be safeguarded and respected; emphasises that the 2014 reform explicitly acknowledges the right of public authorities to provide and organise their services independently through their own institutions, businesses or public undertakings; stresses that the direct provision of services by public or local authorities, the in-house provision of services and public-public cooperation are and should remain available options; 25. Stresses that procurement rules for public undertakings should be better aligned with commercial practices and ensure maximum flexibility to prevent unnecessary restrictions, cost inflation and delays in critical sectors such as energy and utilities; believes that the Commission should analyse this issue in the upcoming impact assessment; 26. Recalls with concern that a significant number of economic operators have experienced exclusion from public procurement procedures because of minor formal irregularities in their tenders, without being afforded the opportunity to remedy such defects, both in open and negotiated procedures; underlines that this practice is detrimental both to the economic operators, which may have invested considerable time and resources in preparing their tenders, and to the contracting authorities, which may be compelled to potentially exclude the MEAT criteria on purely formal grounds; stresses that such rigid formalism undermines the effectiveness, efficiency and competitiveness of public procurement procedures; calls therefore for the establishment of a general principle allowing for the regularisation or clarification of minor irregularities, without the need to cancel the tender, provided that this does not entail a substantial modification of the offer, and insists that this principle should be the rule rather than the exception; emphasises the importance of introducing more flexibility into public procurement procedures while ensuring legal certainty for contracting authorities, including for small and medium-sized contracting authorities; 27. Promotes fair competition among bidders through ensuring that award criteria be designed taking into account new entrants, start-ups, SMEs and innovative businesses, fostering market diversity and competitive pricing; Digital transformation of European public procurement 28. Strongly believes that digitalisation should remain a key element in lowering costs and streamlining public procurement for contracting and bidding entities, especially very small entities and SMEs; suggests, however, that to fully harness the potential of digital tools, the Commission and the Member States must rethink how future procurement legislation should safely facilitate and secure digitalisation, rather than just digitalising current lengthy analogue processes; underlines the importance of public procurement platforms being accompanied by updated, clear and specific guidelines and instructions to ensure that all users, regardless of their level of experience, can effectively navigate and utilise these platforms; highlights the need for increased support and training for contracting authorities on the use of digital tools; 29. Calls for the Commission to adopt a digital-first approach in the revision of the EU public procurement legal framework; recommends focusing particularly on automating and ensuring the interoperability of certain processes, such as through moving to a transaction-based system from an outdated notification-based system, reducing the number of electronic forms and integrating the European single procurement document and eCertis into broader administrative and business systems; considers that this transition will reinforce the possibility of public scrutiny in the procurement process, especially considering the potential offered by disruptive technologies such as artificial intelligence; believes that this transition to automated, transaction-based systems would enhance real-time data capture, streamline procurement processes and allow for better data utilisation, which would be particularly beneficial for SMEs; 30. Stress that establishing pan-EU procurement data architecture with reliable, structured data collection is crucial to driving better intelligence and improving procurement performance across the Member States; stresses, in addition, the importance of promoting interoperability between public databases in order to speed up checks on the accuracy of the requirements by operators and to avoid requesting information already available in various public databases; welcomes, in this context, the Commission’s initiative for a European public procurement data space (PPDS); considers that this initiative has the potential to improve transparency and to support the prevention of misuse of funds, fraud and corruption, as well as to create more procurement opportunities for SMEs and ensure that public spending achieves better value by combining European and national procurement datasets; requests that the Commission explore options for introducing a public procurement digital passport, with special attention paid to SMEs, as a tool to promote SMEs’ participation in public procurement; underlines the need to use current tools such as eForms, eTender, eCertis and the PPDS more effectively in order to move away from analogue processes towards fully digital systems to make procurement decisions smarter; 31. Notes that the introduction of the European single procurement document (ESPD) has not fully achieved its objective of simplifying and facilitating the participation of companies in public procurement, owing to the persistence of operational difficulties that continue to complicate companies’ access – particularly very small entities and SMEs – to procurement procedures; calls on the Commission to streamline and clarify standard procurement documentation, including the ESPD; encourages the Commission and the Member States to explore how procurement systems can interface with other well-functioning administrative systems and databases at national and EU level to improve the EU’s internal market; 32. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure the enforcement of uniform cybersecurity standards aligned with the Cyber Resilience Act(25) and the NIS2 Directive(26), where applicable, in all relevant EU public procurement legislation, as well as to ensure that EU data protection rules are complied with throughout all stages of the procurement process; 33. Calls for the harmonisation of electronic identification and authentication processes across the Member States to ensure secure, efficient and trusted digital public procurement throughout the EU; 34. Is convinced that the Commission, in dialogue with stakeholders and social partners, should assess which procedures provide little added value relative to their costs, administrative burden or contribution to quality and then either improve, automate or eliminate them entirely; 35. Draws attention to the successful adoption of the GovTech procurement model in countries such as Poland, Lithuania and Denmark, as well as the Commission’s recognition of the model as a key tool in achieving the goals outlined in the EU 2030 Digital Compass; believes that building upon successful national experiences and fostering the development of a European GovTech market serves as an opportunity for the public sector to rapidly and efficiently access tailor-made digital solutions, while also supporting a digital-oriented public procurement reform; underlines that the use of GovTech in pre-commercial procurement has so far enabled less financially resourced municipalities to form multi-partner consortia, a model that can be scaled up for larger national projects; notes, however, the existence of certain challenges that undermine the effective use of GovTech and believes that this should be addressed in the future; Specific recommendations for improving European public procurement 36. Calls for a revision of the EU public procurement framework to boost European competitiveness, promote a more sustainable economy, build resilience, ensure legal certainty, while digitalising procedures, reducing and simplifying the rules both for contracting authorities and bidders, and ensuring security of supply for certain vital technologies, products and services, promoting quality jobs and delivering services for citizens, including by respecting collective bargaining agreements in accordance with national laws and practices; stresses that the Commission should propose harmonisation where it can deliver possibly the greatest added value, such as digital procurement tools and the standardisation of tender procedures and structures for joint procurement at both national and cross-border level; in this vein, encourages the use of digital procurement tools to facilitate cross-border participation and calls for the promotion of cross-border public procurement in the single market, particularly in border regions; emphasises that the objective should not be harmonisation for its own sake, but rather to enhance legal certainty, efficiency and predictability, as well as reduce excessive administrative burdens on contracting authorities and bidders, while increasing flexibility, freedom of choice and autonomy for contracting authorities, to ensure the prudent use of taxpayers’ money; 37. Highlights the need to train contracting authorities, including giving an explanation of the rules and adequate clarification of the use of non-price criteria, including the legal basis for the MEAT criteria and the need to ensure the application of Article 18(2) of Directive 2014/24/EU to offer legal certainty to contracting authorities so that they feel more confident using them, while maintaining adequate oversight and data access options; encourages the Commission to further strengthen the professionalisation and training of procurement officials and suggests that the Commission increase funding for further training of contracting authorities to effectively implement the EU public procurement framework; 38. Notes that awarding public contracts based solely on the lowest price might encourage unfair competition and that this is at the expense of quality, sustainability and social standards; insists that more contracts, especially for intellectual services, should be awarded based on the best price-quality ratio, through use of MEAT criteria, meaning that tenders should be evaluated not only on price but also on factors such as quality, regional impact or continuity of supply of complex and essential services; adds that non-price considerations should be given a substantial weight in the overall rating and final decision on the award of contracts, especially for engineering services, which are essential to ensure high-quality, profitable projects in the long term, while protecting innovation and deterring the submission of abnormally low tenders; 39. Recommends that concrete actions should be put forward by the Commission to combat corruption and increase transparency in the use of negotiated procedures without prior publication, notably through strengthening the voluntary ex ante transparency notice; calls for these notices to be published in the Official Journal of the European Union and on the website or other public platform of the relevant contracting authority, depending on the value of the procurement; stresses that these notices must include a justification for the use of the negotiated procedure, outlining the specific reasons for departing from standard procurement methods, without placing an undue administrative burden on the contracting authorities; 40. Calls for a revision of the exclusion criteria in procurement processes, enabling them to better address specific sectoral risks related to fraud, corruption and criminal infiltration; stresses that different sectors require separate tailored exclusion criteria, reflecting their specific vulnerabilities; firmly believes that contracting authorities should be empowered to adapt procurement procedures to combat and address criminal activities; highlights that in order to promote greater efficiency and simplification, the provisions relating to grounds for exclusion should be streamlined through an exhaustive list and a clear distinction between mandatory grounds for exclusion, intended to protect the public interest, and optional grounds for exclusion, intended to protect the interests of the contracting authorities or entities; adds that any economic operator that breaches its obligations under applicable labour and environmental laws pursuant to Article 18(2) of Directive 2014/24/EU should effectively be excluded from the public procurement process in question; 41. Encourages greater cross-border cooperation in public procurement, where it offers clear benefits, such as in large-scale projects, in order to enhance efficiency and cohesion within the EU internal market; supports interoperable digital infrastructure that enables procurement data and procedures to be shared seamlessly across Member States, as this would reduce barriers and enhance market cohesion, benefiting suppliers of all sizes across the EU; 42. Calls for full use to be made of all the flexibility provided under the GPA in EU public procurement law, at least for sub-central contracting, with the aim of achieving a substantive simplification of procurement procedures; highlights that the GPA allows for significantly greater flexibility and more streamlined procedural options concerning the choice and design of procurement processes; calls on the Commission to assess the possibility of allowing small contracting authorities to use simplified procedures, making use of the flexibility provided in Directives 2014/25/EU and 2014/23/EU, in order to address their limited resources and expertise and to reduce unnecessary administrative burdens, thereby enabling them to fulfil their tasks more efficiently; 43. Emphasises that various sector-specific public procurement rules are fragmented and may be difficult to implement for both businesses and local governments; 44. Calls on the Commission to review and assess sector-specific procurement rules and streamline them to reduce unnecessary burdens on contracting authorities while ensuring transparency, efficiency, legal certainty and flexibility; calls for sectoral legislation to remain harmonised with the overall procurement frameworks and to remain restricted to technical specifications; 45. Requests the establishment of uniform non-binding guidelines, standardised monitoring and reporting mechanisms, procedural guarantees, independent oversight bodies with sufficient powers and effective enforcement and compliance tools to promote legal certainty, fair competition, and consistency across public procurement in the EU, without restricting contracting authorities’ discretion; highlights the need for support for contracting authorities, especially those with limited administrative and economic resources in enforcement and to ensure that contractors comply with the agreed contractual obligations; emphasises the importance of the principle of proportionality, meaning that the contracting authority’s decisions, as well as the requirements and conditions set in a tender, must be aligned with the nature and scope of the contract being procured; urges the Commission to clarify this concept to incentivise the use of criteria other than price only; 46. Notes that greater integration of the public procurement market is crucial to achieving the EU’s strategic goals, provided that this fully respects Member States’ competence to define their own strategic priorities; underlines that any efforts to standardise procurement procedures must be guided by the principle of subsidiarity and preserve national flexibility; 47. Stresses that SMEs’ efforts to explore other Member States’ markets should be supported; calls for the sharing of best practice across the EU and the simplification of cross-border procurement procedures; calls on the Member States to encourage business participation in cross-border public procurement by refraining from using language criteria to decline bids in tender procedures; 48. Calls on the Commission to streamline administrative processes as much as possible to ease burdens, refine selection criteria for effective procurement and boost administrative capabilities; believes that standardised criteria make for more accessible and attractive contracts for SMEs, which is essential to foster wider participation and drive innovation in the sector; strongly recommends, therefore, the issuance of standardised criteria in the form of non-binding Commission guidelines; 49. Recommends the introduction of strengthened mechanisms for transparency and oversight in public procurement by integrating advanced data analytics and AI technologies into the procurement process to detect potential non-compliance, irregularities, fraud, national security risks and corruption in real-time; encourages the Commission, in this context, to support the development of a data-driven risk analytics platform connected with supplier registries and both EU and national debarment databases within the PPDS, including the integration of procurement, company and sanctions data to enable proactive fraud detection and integrity monitoring; 50. Considers that the introduction of an EU-wide mechanism that ensures cross-border information sharing for contracting authorities on the economic operators that have been excluded from procurement markets and the duration of their exclusion, in line with Article 57 of Directive 2014/24/EU, would facilitate enforcement, simplify procedures, safeguard public funds, safeguard a level playing field in the internal market and reinforce the security and integrity of critical public infrastructure and services; notes that cross-border information sharing regarding a certain trader being excluded in one Member State is not a prerequisite for that trader’s exclusion in another Member State; 51. Urges the Commission to study the feasibility of an EU-wide register of declarations of interest in the field of public procurement, taking into account the value of contracts, allowing for the identification of personal or professional links between contracting authorities and successful tenderers, in order to prevent situations of conflict of interest that could affect the integrity of the process and to ensure the existence of robust whistleblowing mechanisms; 52. Considers that further simplification and standardisation of public procurement practices are needed; supports the introduction, where appropriate, of standard contract section templates across the Member States in order to create greater uniformity in tendering procedures, reduce administrative burdens and ensure legal clarity for contracting authorities and economic operators, while maintaining flexibility for market-driven solutions; notes, moreover, that the introduction of standard contract section templates across the Member States would also facilitate the integration of contract data into digital platforms, enabling easier tracking and comparison; considers that such standardisation contributes significantly to administrative efficiency and the reduction of transaction costs, as it enables contracting authorities to streamline the preparation of tender documents and economic operators to reuse elements of previous tenders, particularly when participating in multiple procurement procedures; points to the use of standard models, which should allow shorter and more consistent tender documents; 53. Welcomes the priority given by the Commission to reducing the burden on businesses of legally mandated reporting requirements by 25 % and 35 % for SMEs; calls for this priority to be implemented across all sectors and calls for the upcoming public procurement review to be assessed on this basis; 54. Calls on the Commission, the Member States and contracting authorities to make full use of the available tools such as the EU’s trade defence toolbox, to prevent unfair competition from non-EU countries that discriminate against EU countries’ participation in their public procurement processes, and to apply a strict principle of reciprocity with the effective use of the EU’s International Procurement Instrument, especially when it comes to access to strategic sectors of the EU public procurement market; recalls that the EU may restrict access to its public procurement markets in response to breaches of international trade rules, including increases in customs duties that are incompatible with WTO rules; calls, furthermore, for decisive action through the Foreign Subsidies Regulation(27); highlights, moreover, the possibilities offered by Regulation (EU) 2023/2675(28) on the protection of the EU and its Member States from economic coercion by third countries; stresses that the procedures followed before the implementation of rebalancing measures are too slow; calls on the Commission and the Council to allow procedures enabling a quicker reaction; recalls that non-EU countries that are not part of the GPA or have not concluded international agreements with the EU guaranteeing equal and reciprocal access to public procurement cannot claim equal treatment in the area of public procurement, as clarified by CJEU case-law (Case C-652/22); 55. Recalls that the conditions set out in ILO Convention No 94 on Labour Clauses should be respected, and considers that countries that do not comply with them should not be able to access EU public procurement processes; 56. Notes that a significant proportion of contracts in most Member States are awarded based on the lowest price bid; highlights the need to ensure that non-EU companies do not gain an unfair advantage in procurement procedures through direct or indirect state subsidies, thereby distorting fair competition within the internal market; urges the Commission and the Member States to take decisive action against non-EU entities that exploit such subsidies to undercut prices or dominate tenders in a manner inconsistent with EU competition rules; recommends establishing clear and transparent rules for the exclusion of non-EU entities, as well as EU-based companies whose non-EU subcontractors have repeatedly breached EU law; further calls for convergence among Member States on the rules governing the participation of non-EU bidders in public tenders, particularly in the case of projects financed with European funds; 57. Underlines that abnormally low tenders, especially from non-EU bidders, may compromise the effective execution of public contracts, endanger quality standards, and pose risks to national security, particularly in the context of critical infrastructure; calls for stronger measures to detect and address such bids, including through independent cost assessments and clear obligations for contracting authorities to reject offers where the justification for the unusually low price is insufficient or unconvincing; calls, in this context, on the Commission to put forward a clear and harmonised methodology for assessing the notion of ‘abnormally low price’, in order to provide contracting authorities with greater legal certainty and practical guidance when evaluating tenders; 58. Calls on the Commission to set out clearly that bidders from non-EU countries are not eligible to participate in public procurement procedures conducted within the EU if their country of origin does not give, on the basis of a plurilateral or bilateral agreement on public procurement signed with the EU, reciprocal market access for EU bidders; 59. Calls for the continued application of derogations for the outermost regions given the specific challenges these territories face; recognises, furthermore, the unique circumstances of communities residing in EU border regions that engage in regular cross-border economic and social exchange with neighbouring non-EU countries; 60. Seeks to ensure that public procurement incorporates mechanisms that support regional economic resilience, the creation of quality local jobs and the sustainability of local economies, contributing to a more balanced distribution of economic activity between urban and non-urban areas; underlines, in this context, the role of agricultural producers and their supply chains, as well as the paramount role of services of general economic interest; invites the Commission to assess the recommendation contained in the Draghi report to provide contracting authorities with the option of setting an explicit minimum quota for selected locally produced goods in public procurement where appropriate and feasible; emphasises that public procurement practices should foster economic growth without unduly favouring specific sectors or regions, while recognising the importance of strengthening the ability of contracting authorities to give greater weight to social and sustainability criteria, including environmental and climate-related considerations, where they deem it appropriate; 61. Recognises the specific characteristics and strategic role of public procurement in bolstering EU food security and resilience, and acknowledges the need to make better use of sustainability and climate-related criteria, support EU farmers, and promote healthier eating habits as well as sustainable and healthy food policies; 62. Supports increased flexibility in public-public partnerships, enabling public authorities to work together more effectively to enhance service delivery and reduce costs; calls on the Member States to consider developing a public-private partnership and dialogue in public procurement in order to improve the efficiency of processes and the cooperation between public authorities and businesses; recommends revising the current directive’s definition of public-public cooperation to acknowledge such cooperation as any contracts or arrangements made between two or more contracting authorities; calls on the Commission to consider exempting cooperation between public authorities (public-public cooperation) for the purpose of efficient task fulfilment from the scope of the procurement directives, without further restrictive conditions; 63. Stresses that the development and use of trustworthy, high-quality and transparent sustainability labels and certifications help contracting authorities operationalise sustainability objectives, thus reducing the administrative burden and the need for in-depth technical assessments; calls on the Commission to promote and further develop such labels at EU level, ensuring their credibility and usability across sectors; 64. Observes that contracting authorities are already engaged in sustainable and climate-friendly procurement, guided by comprehensive sustainability regulations at the EU, national and regional levels; 65. Underlines, in the light of CJEU case-law (including Case C-395/18), that contracting authorities are entitled to include requirements based on national labour law in procurement documentation, such as binding collective agreements, minimum employment standards, equal pay provisions, and other relevant social criteria; welcomes the clarification by the CJEU that the social and environmental obligations in the Horizontal Social Clause are ‘a cardinal value with which the Member States must ensure compliance’; calls on the Commission to develop guidance and a legal framework, including clarification of the subject matter and its practical application, that ensures legal certainty and empowers contracting authorities – within their own discretion – to apply such criteria without facing disproportionate legal risks; 66. Recognises the significant potential of socially responsible public procurement (SRPP) in promoting decent work, social inclusion and sustainable development; encourages contracting authorities to systematically integrate social criteria in public procurement procedures, while ensuring economic feasibility, flexibility and subsidiarity; calls on the Commission to assess the inclusion of social criteria in the procurement procedures and provide a clear legal and policy framework and practical guidance, including legal clarity and examples of good practices, to enable effective and legally sound implementation of SRPP by contracting authorities; recognises that including social clauses, such as requirements related to working conditions, collective bargaining and respect for labour rights, can significantly enhance the quality and reliability of public procurement outcomes; calls on the Commission to clarify in the revision that the requirements set out in Article 18(2) of Directive 2014/24/EU, relating to environmental, social and labour law, are binding; 67. Believes that public procurement procedures should encourage and reward innovative and sustainable solutions that can stimulate economic development; highlights the importance of introducing and implementing sustainability criteria across Member States in a way that reflects current EU legislation; calls on the Commission in the context of the forthcoming fitness check on EU public procurement legislation to assess the establishment of a sector-specific sustainability criteria toolbox comprising model award and technical criteria, verification methodologies and contractual provisions, with a view to facilitating the progressive adoption of more sustainable procurement practices, offering clarity for contracting authorities while allowing them to tailor requirements to specific sectors and local economic capacities; requests that the Commission examine how sustainability-related aspects can be better integrated when applying the principle of the most economically advantageous tender, in order to foster innovation and efficient resource use; calls on the Commission to develop a set of criteria with the aim of fostering innovation in sustainable technologies and increasing the EU’s competitiveness in future lead markets; believes that strengthening the market for secondary materials should form part of this approach; stresses in this context that the development of a toolbox should be contingent on demonstrable evidence that (a) it does not oblige contracting authorities or contracting entities to incur disproportionate costs or result in incompatibilities or technical difficulties, (b) it takes into account the life cycle, diversity and availability of relevant products and services, and adheres to the principle of technological neutrality, and (c) it preserves fair competition; 68. Recommends the implementation of strategic procurement models that prioritise the interests of the EU and the Member States, as well as long-term value and resilience over short-term cost reductions, and offer lead market opportunities for products respecting the EU’s objectives, particularly in strategic sectors; 69. Requests that the Commission conduct an in-depth impact assessment, in the context of the upcoming review of the public procurement framework, on possible ways and implications of prioritising the ‘European preference’ principle in procurement related to strategic industries so as to ensure the continuity of critical capabilities in Member States and bolster resilience, security, competitiveness and strategic autonomy; emphasises that the Commission should carefully evaluate the potential cost implications, the risks of limiting access to cutting-edge technologies, and the effects on the quality of services and products, while maintaining consistency with the EU’s international legal commitments and not excluding like-minded partners; underlines that any measures to promote the participation of European companies should not amount to protectionism or distort competition; recognises, in that context, the importance of businesses that invest and reinvest in the EU, strengthening the EU’s economy, protecting workers’ welfare and benefiting local communities; invites the Commission, furthermore, to examine opportunities to boost the participation of EU-based companies in procurement processes launched for projects financed by EU institutions or by extension of the preference system set out in Article 85 of Directive 2014/25/EU to contracts awarded by contracting authorities and in Article 15 of Directive 2014/24/EU for targeted strategic sectors; 70. Calls for the inclusion, in public procurement procedures concerning projects of strategic interest for the EU – particularly in the fields of critical infrastructure, advanced technologies and critical raw materials – of provisions allowing contracting authorities to require economic operators to establish industrial partnerships with legal entities based in the EU; is of the view that such partnerships should include clauses ensuring the transfer of technologies, know-how or key technical skills to EU-based partners, in full compliance with Union law and international commitments; 71. Stresses the specific challenges faced by electricity grid operators, with increased delivery times and costs; calls for public procurement procedures for electricity grid operators to be simplified and their flexibility and efficiency ensured; advocates for more consistency between EU regulations impacting the public procurement of electricity grids; 72. Underlines the importance of unlocking investments in the market for public procurement and concessions, and calls on the Commission to examine whether the current framework for the duration of concession contracts adequately reflects post-award investments by concessionaires, and to consider whether greater flexibility would help incentivise such investments; 73. Stresses the need to avoid unnecessary administrative burdens for public buyers and economic operators, including SMEs and micro-enterprises; underlines that, in revising EU public procurement legislation, the need to reduce complexity and cut red tape should be considered at all times in order not to hinder the participation of economic operators in public procurement; requests that the Commission, when assessing options for introducing new criteria in public procurement, ensure that particular attention is given to the stage at which such requirements are inserted within the procurement process; underlines that special attention should be paid to whether these criteria are included in the award criteria or at earlier stages of the procurement documents, ensuring legal clarity and practical feasibility for both contracting authorities and economic operators; 74. Supports the modernisation of procurement criteria to reflect advancements in technology and security, ensuring that new procurement frameworks allow for agile responses to changing economic and geopolitical landscapes while maintaining the autonomy of Member States over managing their procurement policies; notes that EU competitiveness is built together with social and environmental standards in the internal market; stresses that the future frameworks for public procurement should enhance these strengths, not diminish them, in order to strengthen the position of EU actors in public procurement bids; 75. Highlights the importance of the Net Zero Industry Act(29) as an example of resilience criteria related to security of supply, quality jobs, contribution to the EU’s industrial leadership and competitiveness, adherence to cybersecurity standards and reducing dependency on a single non-EU country that does not participate in international procurement agreements; 76. Supports the further digitalisation of public procurement processes, with a view to reducing administrative burdens, improving efficiency and competitiveness, enhancing transparency and facilitating access for SMEs and cross-border bidders, while ensuring compliance with security standards; 77. Calls for enhanced support mechanisms for very small entities, SMEs, start-ups and social economy actors to enable them to effectively compete in public tenders, including technical assistance programmes, and capacity building for SMEs, start-ups and social enterprises; believes that more guidance and support for SMEs is crucial to advance their participation in public procurement; underlines the need to reduce bureaucratic constraints that disproportionately affect participation by SMEs, start-ups and scale-ups, and for proper impact assessments and a mandatory SME and start-up test by the Commission on any and all new rules; highlights the effectiveness of dialogue initiatives in helping SMEs gain better knowledge of public procurement principles, while allowing public procurers to collect information to design more balanced criteria and reduce administrative burdens; supports, where appropriate, the widespread use of sourcing practices by public buyers prior to the design of calls for tender, as well as limits on excessive financial capacity and proof-of-past-performance requirements; signals the need to support SMEs in identifying partners; 78. Calls for the urgent simplification of selection criteria, and in that context, also calls on the Commission to explore whether the creation of an EU-level digital database of pre-qualified SMEs and smaller actors could help streamline procedures and enhance access to public tenders; notes the potential for accreditation systems to be used to determine companies’ technical and financial capacity and verify their professional integrity prior to the tender process and that professional integrity criteria should encompass their track record of compliance with applicable labour, human rights and environmental laws; underlines that effective interoperability and cross-border accessibility of these registers across Member States could essentially strengthen transparency, safeguard public funds, support the internal market and reinforce the security and integrity of critical public infrastructure and services; 79. Stresses that the EU public procurement framework must ensure equitable access for SMEs, social economy entities and local businesses by promoting simplified procedures, including by ensuring that companies are not required to re-submit publicly available information in their tender application and by applying proportional requirements based on the local context; calls on the Commission to consider mainstreaming the division of contracts into smaller lots to foster competition and to prevent dominance by large entities, while recognising that contracts should not be divided where there is a genuine technological or efficiency rationale for not doing so; underlines that this division into smaller lots is of particular relevance for engineering, construction and planning services as it can strengthen competition, safeguard participation opportunities for small and medium-sized enterprises and micro-enterprises, and enable the targeted use of specialised expertise; emphasises the need for clear guidelines determining when non-division of contracts is justified; notes that the division of lots is also an effective means of preventing unfeasible subcontractor chains; 80. Recommends that the procurement framework should allow bidders and contracting authorities to submit missing evidence at a later stage in the procedure, simplifying and accelerating procurement processes, for example, through an expansion of Article 56(3) of Directive 2014/24/EU; recommends that the participation of start-ups and SMEs be promoted by adapting rigid reference requirements that disproportionately hinder newly-established companies; calls for, where appropriate, greater flexibility in qualification criteria to ensure fair access for start-ups to procurement opportunities while maintaining transparency and competition; underlines that flexibility should be considered when requesting track records of contracts from SMEs; 81. Calls on the Commission to ensure that public procurement processes are made more accessible and transparent by providing easily understandable summary tables or overviews of public tenders, which clearly outline recommended technical specifications and requirements of the procured work or service; requests that the Commission particularly consider enterprises with less experience, which should use the tools to better understand and interpret the procurement documents; 82. Reiterates that equitable access to public procurement procedures necessitates a simplification and clarification of the rules for contracting authorities; 83. Highlights that experience with public contracts, such as construction projects, shows that allowing alternative proposals (variant bids) helps contracting authorities procure services more innovatively, efficiently and cost-effectively; emphasises that innovative solutions are more easily integrated into procurement when variant bids are generally allowed and that in order to effectively incorporate entrepreneurial know-how in the awarding of public contracts, alternative proposals (variant bids) should generally be allowed unless the contracting authority specifically decides to exclude them (opt-out); calls upon the Commission to examine the permissibility of alternative proposals (variant bids) pursuant to Article 45(1) of Directive 2014/24/EU; 84. Calls on the Commission to ensure the ‘once only’ principle is applied consistently at all levels of administration in public procurement, so that, in order to reduce administrative burdens, bidders only have to provide certain standard information to the authorities and administrations once; recognises that allowing bidders to use self-declarations of compliance instead of submitting numerous administrative documents at the initial stage can often reduce burdens and increase efficiency; calls on the Commission to identify where such practices could be applied appropriately, while ensuring legal clarity and safeguards; 85. Is of the opinion that reserved contracts for certain services are a good practice that supports the social economy; suggests that preference could be given to SMEs and innovative market operators in the event of equivalent offers or could be implemented through reserved contracts or a reserved part of the contract performance; stresses in that context the effectiveness of reserved contracts in supporting the employment of persons with disabilities through public procurement, while noting that there is still room for improvement in their implementation; 86. Recognises that while subcontracting allows for greater flexibility, access to specialised skills, and cost savings, it can also bring potential risks such as weakened accountability, heightened risk of labour rights violations and obstacles to effective enforcement; calls on the Commission to assess the impact of public contracts being performed mainly by the successful tenderer’s direct workers and recommends that public procurement rules encourage companies to have sufficient in-house staff to implement the projects for which they are awarded public contracts; calls on the Commission, in order to end abusive subcontracting and to protect workers’ rights, to strengthen transparency and accountability throughout the supply chain, and to consider introducing a well-defined regime for joint and several liability of economic operators and subcontractors and for ensuring transparency regarding the subcontractors involved and the share of the contract that the contractor intends to subcontract; 87. Supports contract pricing flexibility through the extension of the maximum duration of framework agreements for contracting authorities, the introduction of provisions that allow price adjustments in response to disproportionate cost increases that the bidder could not reasonably have anticipated, such as inflation, material or energy cost increases and changes in labour laws, ensuring contract viability without imposing financial strain on public authorities, and the extension of the negotiated procedure as the principle for contracts subsequent to a framework agreement; 88. Notes that the rules on innovation procurement remain underused; calls for evaluation of the need to establish additional special procurement rules for scientific research and innovation projects, recognising their critical role in driving economic and technological progress, while ensuring efficient use of public resources; signals the need for additional and solid provisions protecting the intellectual property rights of bidders, including during the tendering process; 89. Believes that the professionalisation of public purchasers should be part of improving public procurement methods within the EU; welcomes national initiatives aiming at helping public purchasers to familiarise themselves with the current legal framework and concepts such as defining the subject matter and designing appropriate selection and award criteria; asks the Commission to develop and promote similar programmes at EU level with a focus on making better use of non-price criteria by establishing ‘ready-to-use’ environmental and social criteria; 90. Highlights the crucial contribution of non-profit organisations, churches and social enterprises in public procurement all around Europe, noting their expertise, strong local connections, and demonstrated capacity to deliver high-quality services; stresses the importance of maintaining and promoting reserved contracts as a powerful instrument to ensure that public procurement supports broader societal objectives, the social economy and the diversity of actors involved; calls, therefore, for strengthening the existing possibility for Member States and contracting authorities to reserve participation in public procurement procedures specifically to actors operating on a non-profit basis; calls on the Commission to reconsider the three-year limit and the obligation not to have provided these services within the previous three years under Article 77 of Directive 2014/24/EU; 91. Calls for a better use of the option laid down in Article 71(3) of Directive 2014/24/EU of enabling direct payment to subcontractors; calls on the Member States to promote the transparency of payments by public authorities to contractors and sub-contractors, and of payments by the contractor to its sub-contractors or suppliers; 92. Calls on the Commission to update its tools for monitoring competition in public procurement; considers that by refining the methodologies and technologies for market analysis, incorporating advanced data analytics and artificial intelligence, the EU should strive to promote a procurement environment that ensures greater competitiveness, fairness, transparency, strategic value and equity; believes such measures can contribute to a clearer understanding of the issue of low competition in public procurement and support the development of new proposals to simplify access to tenders for enterprises; o 93. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2023 and 2024 reports on Ukraine |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
The European Parliament, – having regard to its previous resolutions on Ukraine, – having regard to the Commission staff working document entitled ‘Ukraine 2024 Report’ (SWD(2024)0699) accompanying the 2024 Commission communication on EU enlargement policy (COM(2024)0690), – having regard to the Commission staff working document entitled ‘Ukraine 2023 Report’ (SWD(2023)0699) accompanying the 2023 Commission communication on EU enlargement policy (COM(2023)0690), – having regard to the European Council conclusions of 24 June 2022 granting Ukraine candidate status, of 15 December 2023 endorsing the opening of accession negotiations, and of 20 March 2025, – having regard to Regulation (EU) 2024/792 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 February 2024 establishing the Ukraine Facility(1), – having regard to the report by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) of 2021 entitled ‘OECD Review of the Corporate Governance of State-Owned Enterprises: Ukraine’ and the subsequent follow-up dialogues in 2024, – having regard to the International Monetary Fund’s eighth review of the 2023–2026 Extended Fund Facility for Ukraine, – having regard to the opinions of the Venice Commission of the Council of Europe, in particular the urgent follow-up opinion to the opinions on the Law ‘On Amendments to certain legislative acts of Ukraine to clarify the provisions on the competitive selection of candidates for the position of judge of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine’ of 9 October 2023, and the follow-up opinion to the opinion on the law on national minorities (communities) of 9 October 2023, – having regard to the reports by the Group of States against Corruption (GRECO) on Ukraine, in particular the Fourth Evaluation Round and the addendum to the second compliance report on corruption prevention in respect of members of parliament, judges and prosecutors in Ukraine of 22 November 2024, – having regard to the report submitted by Ukraine pursuant to Article 68, paragraph 1 of the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence (Baseline Report) of 3 July 2025 and to the additional information received by the Group of Experts on Action against Violence against Women and Domestic Violence from Ukrainian civil society organisations, – having regard to Human Rights Watch reports on Ukraine, including its report of 5 December 2024 entitled ‘“All She Did Was Help People” – Flawed Anti-Collaboration Legislation in Ukraine’, – having regard to its resolution of 12 March 2025 on the white paper on the future of European defence(2), – having regard to the statements by the leaders of Finland, France, Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom and Ukraine following the meeting with US President Donald Trump in Washington DC on 18 August 2025, – having regard to the statement by Commission President Ursula von der Leyen with the President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskyy following their meeting in Brussels on 17 August 2025, – having regard to the joint statement issued on 16 August 2025 by the leaders of France, Italy, Germany, the UK, Finland, Poland, the President of the European Council António Costa and Commission President Ursula von der Leyen following the meeting between US President Donald Trump and the President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin in Anchorage, Alaska on 15 August 2025, – having regard to previous declarations, including the joint statement by the leaders of France, Germany, Poland, the UK and Ukraine following the meeting in Kyiv on 10 May 2025 and the Weimar+ joint statement on Ukraine and Euro-Atlantic security of 12 May 2025, – having regard to the joint statement issued by several MEPs on 11 August 2025 on the negotiations towards a just peace for Ukraine based on international law and the will of the Ukrainian people, – having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure, – having regard to the report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (A10-0154/2025), A. whereas Parliament condemns in the strongest possible terms the illegal, unjustified and unprovoked Russian aggression against Ukraine and supports Ukraine’s right to sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity within its internationally recognised borders; whereas Russia invaded Ukraine and therefore the most straightforward and only just path towards peace in Ukraine consists of Russia withdrawing its forces from the entirety of the Ukrainian territory and paying reparations for the damage it caused throughout its illegal war of aggression; B. whereas Russia, with the political, material and military support provided by its allies – in particular Belarus, Iran and North Korea – has been waging an illegal, unprovoked and unjustified full-scale war of aggression against Ukraine since 24 February 2022; whereas Russia’s war against Ukraine began, however, in 2014 with the illegal occupation and annexation of Crimea and the subsequent occupation of parts of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions; whereas this war of aggression constitutes a blatant and flagrant violation of the UN Charter and of the fundamental principles of international law and international humanitarian law, as established by the Geneva Conventions of 1949; C. whereas there was a drastic increase in the number of Russian missile strikes and attacks carried out with unmanned aerial vehicles in June and July 2025, targeting civilian infrastructure, including hospitals, schools, residential buildings and cultural institutions, which resulted in the highest number of civilian casualties since May 2022; whereas, according to data from the UN Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine, at least 232 civilians were killed and 1 343 injured in June 2025, while July 2025 recorded 286 civilian deaths and 1 388 injured, constituting the highest monthly toll of civilian casualties since May 2022; D. whereas Russia is carrying out assassinations and sabotage against prominent Ukrainian public figures, servicemen and critical infrastructure; whereas Andriy Parubiy, the former Speaker of the Verkhovna Rada and former Secretary of the National Security and Defence Council, was brutally assassinated in Lviv on 30 August 2025; E. whereas Russia has been committing documented war crimes and deportations in all the Ukrainian territories that it illegally occupies, and has been relying heavily on information manipulation, disinformation and the spreading of propaganda so as to purposefully keep the population mis- and uninformed; F. whereas on 28 August 2025, Russia launched another utterly brutal drone and missile attack on several buildings in Kyiv, killing at least 23 people and leaving more than 63 injured, including children; whereas the premises of the EU Delegation to Ukraine were severely damaged in the attack, constituting a grave violation of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations; whereas the Kyiv offices of the British Council were also hit during the strikes, suffering serious damage and leaving one person injured; G. whereas, in response to Russia’s war of aggression, the Core Group for the establishment of a Special Tribunal for the Crime of Aggression against Ukraine was launched in January 2023; whereas the International Centre for the Prosecution of the Crime of Aggression was set up in The Hague in March 2023 under Eurojust; whereas the Core Group finalised the legal framework for the Tribunal in March 2025; whereas over 40 countries endorsed its creation through the joint statement of the Foreign Ministers Meeting of 9 May 2025 on the conclusion of the work of the Core Group (Lviv Statement); whereas on 25 June 2025, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Council of Europe Secretary General Alain Berset signed in Strasbourg the formal agreement establishing the Special Tribunal for the Crime of Aggression against Ukraine; H. whereas US President Donald Trump and President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin held a bilateral summit in Anchorage, Alaska on 15 August 2025; whereas this summit was followed by meetings between President Trump and President Zelenskyy along with European leaders on 18 August 2025 in Washington DC; I. whereas Ukraine has shown remarkable resilience and commitment to its European path and has made tangible progress in this regard despite the ongoing Russian war of aggression, which has resulted in the deaths of thousands, inflicted deep trauma on veterans and their families, left many cities and vital civil infrastructure in ruins, and led to the continued occupation of parts of its territory by Russian forces; J. whereas, as a result of the Russian invasion, over 4 million Ukrainians are currently living in EU Member States under the temporary protection mechanism and benefit from rights to residence, access to the labour market, housing, medical care, social welfare assistance and education for their children; K. whereas Ukraine’s EU accession process constitutes an important contribution to and path towards peace and prosperity for Ukraine, a strategic response to Russia’s aggression and a credible security guarantee for Ukraine, reinforcing the EU’s geopolitical resilience; L. whereas the legislative reforms Ukraine has initiated reflect its dedication to alignment with the EU acquis; M. whereas GRECO continues to acknowledge the strong commitment shown by Ukraine in respect of work to counter corruption at an extremely difficult time for the country; whereas GRECO in particular recognised Ukraine’s progress in preventing corruption among parliamentarians, judges and prosecutors; whereas, despite progress in areas such as judicial independence and systemic corruption, challenges remain which must be addressed through greater governmental accountability, further strengthening of institutional capacities, and international oversight; N. whereas the OECD noted that Ukraine has made significant strides in reforming its anti-corruption framework in the past decade through enhancing transparency, accountability and integrity through open data, digitalisation, and bolstering of the independence of anti-corruption bodies; O. whereas in mid-July 2025, the Ukrainian authorities attempted to undermine the independence of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and the Specialised Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO) by adopting Law 12414, granting the Prosecutor General extensive powers to interfere with their investigations; whereas on 31 August 2025, as a result of extensive internal and external pressure, the Verkhovna Rada adopted Law 13533 in the aim of at re-establishing the status quo ante, thus taking the necessary measures towards fully restoring the independence of the NABU and SAPO; P. whereas while Ukraine scored 35 out of 100 points and ranked 105th out of 180 countries on Transparency International’s 2024 Corruption Perceptions Index, and while there has been a strong commitment to anti-corruption efforts, actual reforms to implement these intentions are still needed; whereas comprehensive public-administration reform, the fight against corruption, the promotion of fundamental rights and the effective functioning of democratic institutions are core conditions for EU accession; Q. whereas Ukraine has made advancements in regional cooperation and in socio-economic reforms to align its policies with EU standards; R. whereas Ukraine’s democratic institutions have demonstrated adaptability by showcasing that, even amid Russia’s ongoing war of aggression and under martial law, Ukraine remains an institutionally, democratically and economically viable state; whereas, while Ukraine remains at war and is under martial law, elections are legally banned and impractical; whereas Parliament welcomes indications that preparations for elections may begin once martial law has ended; S. whereas progress has been made on public administration reform, but further capacity building, evidence-based policymaking, and improvements to human resources management are still required; T. whereas the judiciary has resumed key functions, including the vetting of judges and the implementation of anti-corruption measures, though integrity and transparency standards must be strengthened and there should be continuous oversight from international partners; U. whereas the strengthening of the independence of the judiciary has benefited from the assistance of international experts in judicial selection commissions, which has also built public trust in the judicial system; V. whereas international experts’ involvement in the selection of the High Qualification Commission of Judges (HQCJ) ended on 1 June 2025; W. whereas Ukraine has shown a commitment, despite the continuous destruction of energy facilities by Russia, to the green agenda through legislation on renewable energy and by aligning with the objectives of the European Green Deal; X. whereas the environmental damage caused by Russia has had devastating consequences for Ukraine’s natural resources, critical ecosystems and people’s health, livelihoods and security; whereas green recovery is about remedying that damage and setting Ukraine on a new path of environmental and social sustainability aligned with the environmental laws in the EU acquis; whereas Ukraine ceased to operate as a transit country for Russian gas on 1 January 2025; Y. whereas foreign investors and multinational corporations have significantly expanded their control over Ukraine’s natural resources, including agricultural land, minerals and critical infrastructure; whereas such developments risk undermining national sovereignty, food security and economic self-determination; Z. whereas in 2024, the EU purchases of Russian fossil fuels totalled EUR 21,9 billion, surpassing the EUR 18,7 billion in financial aid provided to Ukraine that same year; whereas since the start of the full-scale invasion, the EU has spent more than EUR 200 billion on Russian fossil fuels, thus contributing to funding Russia’s war chest; whereas the Commission has announced an end to Russian gas imports by 2027; whereas if the EU continues importing Russian energy at the rate it did in 2024, it would pay an additional EUR 57,4 billion to Russia before the end of 2027; AA. whereas civil society remains a pillar of resilience and democracy in Ukraine; whereas, despite the restrictions imposed by martial law, NGOs continue to operate relatively unhindered, though instances of pressure against activists raise concerns and require government action; whereas recent abrupt US funding cuts have had devastating consequences for Ukrainian civil society; AB. whereas the freedom of expression and media independence face challenges, particularly under martial law; whereas measures are required to restore pluralism, protect journalists and create a financially enabling environment; whereas it is understandable that certain restrictions are necessary during martial law; AC. whereas the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC) has raised serious concerns regarding the deterioration of labour rights in Ukraine, including violations of trade union freedoms and social dialogue; whereas freedom of association, collective bargaining, and the right to strike are protected under International Labour Organization (ILO) conventions to which Ukraine is a party, and are key elements of the EU acquis and the Copenhagen criteria; AD. whereas Ukraine’s EU integration process is widely supported by public and institutional consensus, reflecting a strong societal commitment to EU membership despite the current difficulties; AE. whereas EU accession carries a distinct security dimension and strong symbolic significance for the country and its population, in the context of Ukraine's existential war against ongoing Russian aggression; whereas the EU’s unwavering support for Ukraine’s sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence are not dependent on the speed of the country’s European integration; AF. whereas EU membership remains a crucially important driver for the democratic development of Ukraine and will represent a key factor in ensuring the country’s future security, stability and independence; whereas Ukraine’s EU membership is a strategic investment in peace, security, democracy and prosperity for the entire continent as it will strengthen the Union by contributing to its geopolitical resilience, enhancing its economic potential, and reinforcing its commitment to shared values of democracy, the rule of law and freedom; AG. whereas accession remains a merit-based process and progress on reform implementation must be assessed thoroughly and carefully, which is also in the interest of Ukraine; The Russian war of aggression as the context for Ukraine's EU accession preparations 1. Condemns in the strongest terms the Russian Federation’s ongoing war of aggression against Ukraine and Russia’s indiscriminate attacks on civilians and civilian infrastructure; reiterates its unwavering solidarity with the brave people of Ukraine, who, since 2014, have paid the highest price in defending Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, and in protecting Europe and our shared democratic values and principles; expresses its deepest condolences to the families of the fallen heroes and innocent civilian victims of the Russian aggression, including the more than 600 children who have been killed; 2. Strongly condemns Russia’s organised assassinations of prominent Ukrainian public figures and servicemen and its sabotage of Ukraine’s critical infrastructure; expresses horror and outrage at the heinous assassination, on 30 August 2025 in Lviv, of Andriy Parubiy, the former Speaker of the Verkhovna Rada and former Secretary of the National Security and Defence Council, who had demonstrated strong commitment to Ukraine’s European aspirations; 3. Expresses its outrage at the intensified drone and missile attacks carried out by Russia against civilian targets, including the attack on Kyiv on 28 August 2025, when the EU Delegation to Ukraine and the British Council were directly targeted; stresses that the recent attack, as well as all other strikes targeting civilian infrastructure, constitutes a war crime and showcases once again Russia’s blatant disregard for human life, international law, US efforts towards peace and the fundamental principles governing the protection of civilians; 4. Confirms its unwavering commitment to the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine, within its internationally recognised borders; reiterates its policy of non-recognition of temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine by Russia, including Crimea; strongly underlines Ukraine’s inherent right to self-defence, in line with Article 51 of the UN Charter, which entails the right to strike military targets on Russian soil; reaffirms the EU’s commitment to a just and lasting peace in Ukraine on terms that are acceptable to Ukraine and its people, ensuring the preservation of its sovereignty and territorial integrity, and the prosecution of those responsible for war crimes, as well as the payment of reparations; calls for the EU and its Member States to actively work towards maintaining and achieving the broadest possible international support for Ukraine and identifying a peaceful solution to the war that must be based on full respect for international law and Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, and accountability for war crimes and the crime of aggression, as well as Russian payments for the massive damage caused in Ukraine; stresses that any peaceful solution must respect the will of the Ukrainian people and not be imposed by any other international actor and must not reward aggression or undermine Ukraine’s future security; regards the disingenuous approach to negotiations and unserious proposals by Russian leaders over the past months as additional proof that Russia intends to prolong its war on the entire Ukrainian territory as long as it can and is allowed to; stresses that peace negotiations must be preceded by an unconditional ceasefire; calls for continued EU support to Ukrainian and international efforts to strengthen the documentation and investigation of war crimes committed by Russian forces; 5. Expresses deep concern over the shift in the United States’ stance on Russia’s war of aggression, which has included engaging directly with Russia without exerting meaningful pressure, publicly renouncing major leverage, refusing additional and discussing lifting of sanctions, and attempting to coerce Ukraine into making territorial concessions and relinquishing its legitimate right to self-defence; stresses that in light of these developments, the EU and its Member States must remain Ukraine’s primary strategic allies and should reinforce their leadership role in supporting Ukraine’s struggle for sovereignty, peace and justice; acknowledges that Ukraine’s security represents a crucial part of the EU’s security; notes that EU support to Ukraine has now surpassed that of the United States, underlining the EU’s vital role in sustaining Ukraine’s resilience and recovery; 6. Stresses that the EU and its Member States must significantly increase the effectiveness and accelerate the delivery of military, material and financial assistance they provide to uphold Ukraine’s right to self-defence; insists that the EU and its Member States, together with partners and allies, must contribute to robust security guarantees for Ukraine in order to deter further Russian aggression and enable Ukraine to fully focus on pursuing the necessary reforms on the path towards EU accession; underlines the importance of permanently strengthening the security of the EU’s and NATO’s eastern flank in response to threats from Russia; calls for the development of military and logistical infrastructure in Ukraine’s neighbouring countries; recognises Ukraine’s sovereign right to choose its military alliances; 7. Takes note of the recent meeting between US President Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin and stresses that it contrasts blatantly with Russia’s massive escalation of attacks against Ukraine, which prove yet again that Russia is not at all interested in peace, but rather in subjugating Ukraine; underlines that Vladimir Putin is disingenuously engaging with US peace efforts and is merely playing for time in order to continue Russia’s war of aggression; calls on President Trump to act on his announcement that the United States would adopt further resolute economic sanctions against Russia and those countries that are fuelling its war machine; stresses that no durable and just peace in Ukraine can be negotiated without the full participation of Ukraine’s leadership and the support of its people, as well as the participation of the European Union; notes with approval that a meeting took place between President Trump and President Zelenskyy and a number of European leaders on 18 August 2025; reaffirms its steadfast commitment to providing security guarantees and taking all the necessary steps to strengthen Ukraine’s armed forces and defence industry; rejects any Russian claims to be a guarantor of future security arrangements for Ukraine and any attempts to condition the numerical and operational sovereignty of the Ukrainian armed forces; 8. Recalls that Europe has already supported Ukraine with EUR 50 billion in military aid but underlines that further assistance is required and that such support now depends largely on Europe itself; urges the Member States to provide more arms and ammunition to Ukraine before any negotiations are concluded, and to substantially reinforce intelligence sharing with Ukraine; calls on the EU Member States, international partners and NATO allies to lift all restrictions on the use of Western weapons systems delivered to Ukraine against military targets in Russian territory; welcomes Ukraine’s efforts to strengthen its domestic defence industrial base, including the production of drones and other critical technologies; insists on the paramount importance of cooperation with and the integration of Ukraine into EU defence initiatives, including the integration of the Ukrainian defence industry into the European Defence Technological and Industrial Base in order to strengthen the EU's strategic autonomy; encourages the development of joint arms manufacturing projects with EU and NATO partners; calls on the Commission and the Member States to support these initiatives through the European Defence Industrial Strategy and relevant instruments, in order to reinforce Ukraine’s long-term self-defence capabilities; highlights the urgency of properly financing the European defence industry programme’s Ukraine Support Instrument, which has not yet had any funds allocated to it; 9. Reiterates its call on the EU Member States to follow the Danish and Dutch examples to partner with the Ukrainian defence industry and support their production capacities in the most efficient manner; 10. Welcomes the achievements of the EU Military Assistance Mission in support of Ukraine (EUMAM), which has provided training for Ukrainian military personnel; supports the Council’s decision of 8 November 2024 to extend the mandate of the mission for two years; calls for EUMAM’s financial, logistical and human resources to be expanded and adapted to the evolving military training needs of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, as well as to long-term reform efforts in line with the joint security commitments between the EU and Ukraine; emphasises that EUMAM should also act as a platform for the exchange of best practices, ensuring that European forces benefit from the battlefield experience of the Ukrainian Armed Forces; 11. Condemns in the strongest terms the violent actions of Russia, and the complicity of Belarus, in the mistreatment of Ukrainian children, including murder, forced transfer, deportation and illegal adoption and in erasing Ukrainian identity by enforced Russification; calls for the EU to cooperate closely with and support Ukrainian authorities, international organisations and NGOs in documenting all missing and deported children, ensuring their safe return and reintegration, and providing the necessary legal, psychological and social support; 12. Condemns Russia’s inhumane treatment of Ukrainian prisoners of war, including torture and executions, which grossly violates the Geneva Conventions, while Russian prisoners of war in Ukraine enjoy all the rights afforded to them by international law, including visits and assistance from the international organisations such as the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC); welcomes the largest prisoner exchange to date, which took place in May 2025, and calls for the EU, its Member States and the international community to facilitate further exchanges and apply necessary pressure to ensure they continue; deplores the illegal imprisonment of Ukrainian civilians by Russia, who are being held incommunicado and under inhumane conditions, which includes torture and extrajudicial killings; calls for increased international pressure to ensure the release of all detained Ukrainians; calls on the ICRC to insist that the Russian authorities provide international ICRC representatives unhindered access to all locations where Ukrainian prisoners of war are held; 13. Underlines the importance of comprehensive accountability and justice mechanisms; welcomes Ukraine’s ratification of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court and corresponding amendments to the Criminal Code; welcomes the Core Group Foreign Ministers’ Joint Statement (Lviv Statement) of 9 May 2025 on the establishment of a Special Tribunal for the Crime of Aggression against Ukraine; underlines that prosecuting the crime of aggression is essential for upholding the rules-based international order and preventing impunity; calls for the EU institutions and Member States to continue supporting the establishment and functioning of the Special Tribunal within the framework of the Council of Europe; encourages all parties to guarantee that Ukrainian civil society organisations and victims of the war can play a meaningful role in the tribunal’s work; is convinced that a just and lasting peace is possible only when Ukrainian children, other civilians forcibly deported or detained, and prisoners of war, are released and reunited with their families, and when those responsible are brought to justice; 14. Welcomes the European Court of Human Rights judgement of 9 July 2025 in the case of Ukraine and the Netherlands v. Russia, which held Russia responsible for widespread and flagrant abuses of human rights in Ukraine – including the downing of MH17, torture, rape as a weapon of war, summary executions, unlawful and arbitrary detentions, and the organised removal of children to Russia and their adoption there; 15. Underlines that sanctions, alongside the prevention and countering of sanction circumvention, remain crucial instruments to undermine Russia’s capacity to continue its war of aggression and to neutralise threats posed to European security; calls for the expansion of sanctions targeting the Russian economy, including in the metallurgy, nuclear, chemical, energy and financial sectors; welcomes the adoption of 18 packages of sanctions against the Russian Federation and calls for the EU and its Member States to adopt additional sanctions packages, particularly aimed at tackling the circumvention of existing measures; stresses that strict implementation and enforcement of sanctions are essential to deprive Russia’s war machine of resources and strengthen Ukraine’s resilience; calls on the Commission and the Member States to work to ensure continued US participation in sanctions implementation against Russia in order to maintain the pressure on Russia’s economy and state budget; is of the opinion that sanctions must be extended and continued until Russia ends its war of aggression against Ukraine and pays war reparations; 16. Urges an accelerated phasing out of Russian hydrocarbon products in the EU to finally achieve a total ban; reiterates that ending the EU energy dependence on Russia’s hydrocarbons is essential for Europe’s energy security; welcomes the effective implementation of the EU’s full embargo on Russian coal, which has ended the EU’s dependence on Russian coal; recalls the EU embargo on Russian oil but regrets that the Hungarian Government and the Slovak Government have chosen to remain dependent on it and urges them to swiftly end this harmful reliance, where needed, with specific support measures; calls on the Council to sanction all vessels operating within the Russian shadow fleet and contact the flag states to de-list these vessels from their ships register, thereby making them ‘uninsurable’ for insurance companies; urges the increase of efforts to prevent the circumvention of existing sanctions against Russian oil; urges the EU and G7 coalition to lower the price cap on oil to further reduce Russia’s financial capacity to wage war; welcomes the Re-Power EU Plan recently announced by the Commission; urges the Commission, however, to advance the timelines thereof wherever possible and to take where needed interim measures such as lowering the oil price cap and implementing a liquefied natural gas price cap and import quota; strongly rejects calls to resume projects like Nord Stream 1 and 2; deeply regrets that more than three years after the start of the full-scale invasion, the Council has not adopted a full embargo on Russian gas; calls for a swift adoption of such a measure; 17. Deplores the obstructive behaviour of governments within the EU that have threatened to veto or undermine restrictive measures against Russia; supports the intention to criminalise the violation and circumvention of sanctions in Ukraine, as proposed in urgent draft law No. 12406; underlines that enforcing such legislation is essential to closing loopholes that allow sanctioned assets to be withdrawn during the blocking stage and to bringing to justice enablers of Russia’s war of aggression; urges Ukraine to adopt this draft law in line with the relevant EU best practices; 18. Urges the Commission and the Member States to confiscate the immobilised Russian assets and make them available for Ukraine’s defence, reconstruction and reparations for victims, in line with international law and the principle of state responsibility; stresses, in order to achieve the former, the paramount importance of ensuring that sovereign Russian assets remain immobilised within the EU; 19. Calls for strong leadership from the Council and the Commission to find a sustainable solution regarding the EU’s temporary protection mechanism for over 4 million Ukrainians, which has been extended until March 2026; emphasises the need to ensure equal treatment and prevent fragmentation across the EU; highlights the importance of upholding the rights of Ukrainians who cannot return and wish to remain in the EU, while also supporting those who choose to return and rebuild their lives in Ukraine; 20. Encourages Ukraine and the Member States to cooperate closely with a view to maximising the potential economic participation of Ukraine’s refugee and diaspora population to ensure resilience and inclusivity of Ukraine’s ongoing and future economic recovery and reconstruction; 21. Calls on political forces in Ukraine to remain united and continue to be guided by a sense of firm political unity and cohesion, which has proven to amplify Ukraine’s resilience in the face of the ongoing existential threat to the country’s freedom and independence; calls on all political actors in Ukraine, in particular those currently in power, to use their wartime powers to foster political unity and coherent and inclusive policymaking; Commitment to EU accession 22. Strongly welcomes Ukraine’s steadfast dedication to meeting the requirements of EU membership, including compliance with the EU acquis, despite Russia’s brutal and relentless war of aggression and its recently renewed escalation; urges Ukraine to maintain its dedication and pace of reforms; highlights the strong momentum in the implementation of reforms in Ukraine and welcomes Ukraine’s increasing rate of alignment with the EU’s common foreign and security policy, which amounted to 95 % in 2024; notes that EU reform demands under the accession process are supported by over 70 % of Ukrainians, underlining the significance of continued EU leverage, structured conditionality and public communication during this period; Democracy, the rule of law and the fight against corruption 23. Commends Ukraine’s extraordinary efforts in strengthening democratic institutions during wartime; encourages Ukraine and its government to keep up the pace of reforms; recalls that, according to widely recognised democratic principles and Ukraine’s Constitution, elections cannot be held during wartime and under martial law; underlines that democratic elections require adequate time for preparation and access to information to meet international standards; calls on the Ukrainian authorities to refrain from untimely and politically motivated judicial proceedings and sanctions against opposition representatives, and to uphold parliamentary pluralism and foster constructive dialogue across political factions in the Verkhovna Rada; 24. Reiterates the recommendation, in the context of EU accession, to lift all restrictions on mandate-related and political foreign travel for members of the Verkhovna Rada; emphasises the importance of respecting and reinforcing the institutional role of the Verkhovna Rada, and supports ongoing reform efforts to enhance its legislative capacity, oversight of the executive and accountability to the public; 25. Welcomes the adoption of the Law on Law-Making, which the Commission has assessed as a foundational step towards a more structured and effective legislative process in Ukraine following the eventual lifting of martial law and the efforts of Ukraine’s Central Election Commission in updating the national voter register; 26. Salutes the development by Ukraine, in cooperation with the Commission, of three reform roadmaps covering the rule of law, public administration reform and the functioning of democratic institutions, with anti-corruption efforts embedded throughout; notes that these roadmaps, once approved by the Commission, will serve as a critical benchmark for monitoring Ukraine’s reform progress; welcomes the inclusion of anti-corruption efforts as an integral element of all three roadmaps; underlines the importance of anchoring reforms within broader societal and political transformations to ensure their long-term durability, effective implementation, and the independent functioning of public institutions; stresses the importance of nurturing a constructive political culture and fostering trust-based cooperation among political parties in Ukraine; notes positively the active participation of Ukrainian parliamentarians in the Jean Monnet Dialogue and encourages the application of European best practices to promote cross-party collaboration in the face of shared challenges on the path to EU membership; 27. Welcomes progress in judicial reform during the reporting period and encourages Ukraine to further enhance transparency in its legislative processes and to allocate to it increased financial, human and technical resources to address the challenges obstructing judicial development, increase judicial independence and strengthen the fight against corruption, thereby ensuring alignment with EU standards while avoiding superficial measures that could hinder EU accession; 28. Notes that, despite the improved legislative framework, the judiciary remains one of the sectors more vulnerable to corruption and political interference, as evidenced by repeated instances of high-scale corruption and undue influence in court and judicial institutions operations, including the Constitutional Court of Ukraine (CCU) and the HQCJ; notes with concern the continued paralysis of the CCU, and urges swift appointment of the remaining judges and filling of vacancies at the High Council of Justice; calls, furthermore, on the Verkhovna Rada to adopt a Law on the Constitutional Court in line with Venice Commission opinions and, in addition, calls on Ukraine to adopt an action plan and internal reforms to prevent undue interference and to strengthen judicial ethics; underlines the particular importance of safeguarding the institutional independence of the HQCJ also in the light of commitments made under international agreements, including with the International Monetary Fund; emphasises the need to intensify the fight against corruption and vested interests in the judiciary, which is indispensable for building public trust and advancing Ukraine’s accession process; highlights the importance of transparent and merit-based selection processes for judicial governance bodies and managerial positions, including the involvement of independent national and international experts; stresses the need for depoliticised judicial appointments, functional integrity safeguards, transparency, integrity, accountability and enhanced international monitoring to prevent selective justice and foster public confidence in the judiciary; 29. Notes with concern the critical shortage of judges, excessive caseloads in most courts, substantial funding deficiencies and the uneven distribution of judicial work, all of which undermine the quality and timeliness of proceedings and impede citizens’ access to justice; stresses the need to address these issues, including through the use of mediation and procedural filtering mechanisms to alleviate pressure on the judiciary; notes that Transparency International ranked Ukraine 105th out of 180 countries in its 2024 Corruption Perceptions Index, scoring 35 out of 100 points, which underscores the scale of ongoing challenges in anti-corruption governance; stresses that improving judicial education and completing the digitalisation of Ukraine’s courts are key to Ukraine’s broader judicial reform; 30. Welcomes the appointment of a new head of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) and the commencement of independent audits to evaluate the effectiveness of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) in combating corruption; salutes the entry into force of the amended Criminal Code and of the Criminal Procedure Code, which are expected to enhance the efficiency of anti-corruption enforcement, notably through improvements to the plea bargaining framework; recognises the increase in annual verdicts delivered by the High Anti-Corruption Court (HACC) and the rise in indictments submitted by NABU and the Specialised Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO), reflecting steady progress in prosecutorial activity; welcomes the restoration of asset declaration procedures and public access, the strengthening of conflict-of-interest regulations, and improvements in the independence of the Specialised Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office; commends the adoption of the action plan for implementing the 2024–2025 asset recovery strategy and related measures; calls for the urgent reform of the Asset Recovery and Management Agency and supports the prompt adoption of draft law No. 12374-d to enhance its functioning; welcomes the expansion of staff within the Specialised Environmental Prosecutor’s Office of the Office of the Prosecutor General and urges continued development of anti-corruption policies in natural resource governance; 31. Notes the continuing shortage of judges at the HACC and stresses the urgency of launching a new transparent competition to fill vacant posts, ensuring the Court has sufficient personnel and premises to function effectively; highlights the need to fill the vacant position of Prosecutor General without delay and underlines the importance of reinforcing the institutional independence of the office, while ensuring proper checks on its powers; 32. Encourages Ukraine to safeguard the independence and effectiveness of anti-corruption institutions, including SAPO and NABU, by ensuring transparent appointment procedures, shielding these bodies from political interference, and reinforcing their institutional autonomy; stresses the importance of granting SAPO greater independence from the Prosecutor General’s Office and of equipping NABU with the means for timely access to forensic expertise and autonomous wiretapping capacity to conduct effective investigations; commends Ukraine for increasing the number of staff of SAPO and underlines the need to match this growth with adequate financial and technical resources to ensure operational capacity; encourages Ukraine to consider a structural reform of the State Bureau of Investigations in order to strengthen its independence and effectiveness to prevent it from being abused in the context of post-war political developments in Ukraine, in particular in connection with electoral campaigns; 33. Expresses concern at the failed attempt by the Ukrainian authorities to undermine the independence of the anti-corruption institutions; welcomes the robust opposition by civil society to those unacceptable attempts, which forced the authorities to backtrack; considers this move by the authorities a dangerous attempt to undermine the achievements of a genuine fight against corruption; underscores that – had it been successful – this step would have merely benefited Ukraine’s enemies; stresses that this should serve as a stark reminder to all those in Ukraine who, out of narrow-minded interests, do not shy away from putting the country’s future at risk; reiterates that fighting corruption requires a long-term commitment and comprehensive efforts to establish good governance with well-functioning checks and balances; supports the Commission’s position that these institutions are crucial to Ukraine’s reform agenda and must operate independently to fight corruption and maintain public trust; 34. Welcomes the adoption of the Law ‘On Lobbying’ as part of Ukraine’s de-oligarchisation agenda; stresses the need for a renewed and comprehensive strategy to counter oligarchic influence, ensuring the involvement of national stakeholders, international experts, and civil society organisations; encourages the Ukrainian authorities to continue working on reforming the governance of state-owned enterprises (SOE) in line with OECD guidelines, in order to minimise the potential for patronage and to prevent corruption, including by publishing all SOE beneficial-ownership data, and ensuring that all major SOEs have independent, gender-balanced boards; 35. Emphasises the importance of further reform in financial control, including improving the monitoring performance by the State Audit Service and proper implementation of the Accounting Chamber reform to safeguard national spending; 36. Acknowledges the findings of the addendum to the Second Compliance Report adopted by the Council of Europe’s Group of States against Corruption on 22 November 2024, according to which Ukraine has implemented satisfactorily or dealt with in a satisfactory manner 18 out of 31 recommendations contained in the report; encourages Ukraine to fully implement the remaining recommendations, particularly by introducing a system for random allocation of cases to prosecutors, clarifying the definitions of disciplinary offences, and expanding the range of disciplinary sanctions to ensure proportionality and effectiveness, taking into account Ukraine’s specific circumstances; 37. Urges Ukraine to prioritise the strengthening of the rule of law, judicial reform and the fight against corruption, and calls for the EU and the Member States to intensify support for these efforts, as progress in these areas is critical not only for EU membership but also for successful reconstruction and economic trust; recommends the adoption of a robust whistleblower protection law in line with the EU acquis; notes that Ukraine’s current anti-corruption policy framework expires in 2025 and highlights the need for a renewed State Anti-Corruption Programme that reflects civil society input and sets ambitious goals, measurable criteria and clear timelines; 38. Calls on the Commission to include Ukraine in the EU rule-of-law toolbox to strengthen democratic reform implementation in advance of accession; encourages enhanced law enforcement capacity for financial investigations by developing methodological guidance and clarifying responsibilities, including better responses to criminal schemes such as the use of money mules; 39. Notes that Russia’s war of aggression places immense pressure on Ukraine’s judicial system, including as a result of the high volume of ‘collaboration’ cases; calls, in this regard, for careful application of the legislation on ‘collaboration’, safeguarding fundamental rights and judicial fairness, and encourages a unified prosecutorial approach based on legal clarity and factual rigour, crucial for the reintegration of liberated territories; encourages the Ukrainian authorities, in this respect, to prioritise prosecutions based on their gravity and relevance to state security, in line with the Fourth Geneva Convention; calls for improved transparency and public access to data on such prosecutions; 40. Urges Ukraine to regulate virtual assets by adopting comprehensive legislation, designating a supervisory authority, conducting a risk assessment, and supporting the detection of financial crimes involving virtual assets; welcomes, in this respect, the recent adoption by the Verkhovna Rada of draft law No. 11290 and urges the adoption of draft law No. 12207, which inter alia introduces European cybersecurity certification schemes and aims to align the Ukrainian legislation with EU standards; Fundamental freedoms and human rights 41. Commends Ukraine’s commitment to upholding fundamental rights in the context of and despite the ongoing Russian war of aggression; underlines the essential role of civil society in the reform and EU accession processes; stresses the need to maintain a safe, enabling, and participatory environment for civil society organisations, including human rights defenders and activists; calls for the urgent update of the National Human Rights Strategy and for a comprehensive implementation plan; encourages meaningful civil dialogue across all areas of public and political life and urges continued political unity around Ukraine’s European path; encourages the alignment of legislation defining the mandate of the Ombudsman of Ukraine with the EU acquis; 42. Recognises the challenges in maintaining pluralistic media in wartime conditions, including market collapse, security constraints and human resource shortages; believes that Ukraine’s vibrant information space and media freedom constitute one of the country’s key strengths in resisting the Russian invasion and its propaganda; calls for the restoration of full nationwide broadcasting for media providers as a matter of policy, firmly rejecting a further slide into political censorship while applying wartime restrictions, as they are necessary; 43. Commends the courageous work of Ukrainian human rights defenders and journalists who document human rights violations in temporarily occupied regions; recognises Ukraine’s strategic position at the forefront of information warfare and welcomes its engagement in European initiatives such as the Democracy Shield and the Joint Security Commitments to counter foreign information manipulation and interference (FIMI); acknowledges that Ukraine is a key partner of the EU in the fights against FIMI and urges the EU and its Member states to intensify the fight against Russian disinformation and hybrid threats; calls for digital literacy to be promoted, the Digital Services Act to be enforced on social media platforms, and the EU’s own strategic communications to be strengthened to counter Russian interference and to clearly publicise the EU’s substantial support for Ukraine; 44. Welcomes legislative initiatives to promote equality for LGBTQI+ persons and other marginalised groups, notably draft laws 5488 (hate crimes), 12252 (civil partnerships), and 9103 (registered partnerships); urges prompt adoption of these laws to ensure compliance with European Court of Human Rights standards; calls for the adoption of a new Anti-Discrimination Law covering sexual orientation, gender identity and disability, and for the further strengthening of Ukraine’s anti-discrimination legal framework; 45. Welcomes the July 2024 amendments to the Law on National Minorities introducing bilingual education pathways, and encourages the swift implementation of these reforms through adequate funding and teacher training; welcomes the creation of the Council of National Minorities and the adoption of the Action Plan for the Protection of the Rights of National Minorities until 2027, aimed at aligning legislation with European standards; calls for structured and substantive dialogue with minority communities and for the full implementation of Venice Commission recommendations; 46. Commends Ukraine’s ability to ensure educational continuity and reform, notably through digital tools, EU-supported programmes, and resilient public infrastructure development; encourages the Commission to expand support for Ukrainian students and institutions under Erasmus+, Horizon Europe and the EU4Youth programmes; 47. Welcomes Ukraine’s ratification of the Istanbul Convention and the establishment of survivor-support centres; encourages Ukraine to provide sustained funding for gender-based violence prevention and victim support, especially given the heightened risks during war; encourages Ukraine to improve the Law ‘On the Principles of Preventing and Combating Discrimination in Ukraine’ and the Criminal Code of Ukraine on hate crimes in accordance with international standards, and to introduce the necessary legislative changes to implement the Istanbul Convention; 48. Recognises the increased risks of human trafficking, especially for women and children, in conflict and post-conflict settings; calls on the Ukrainian authorities, with EU support, to strengthen detection mechanisms, and to collaborate with civil society to ensure the protection and rehabilitation of victims in line with the EU Anti-Trafficking Directive(3); 49. Supports enhanced EU assistance to Ukraine in the field of physical rehabilitation and prosthetic care, especially for injured soldiers, mine victims and amputees; stresses the importance of developing a national prosthetics and rehabilitation system with EU and Member State support; encourages partnerships with European medical institutions to enhance capacity, training and access to modern equipment; 50. Takes note of the adoption of the law that will allow the Orthodox parishes from Ukraine to disaffiliate from the jurisdiction of the Moscow Patriarchate and to decide freely on their new hierarchical affiliation; condemns the unlawful appropriation and removal of cultural heritage items from temporarily occupied Ukrainian territories by Russian forces; urges respect for religious and cultural heritage in temporarily occupied areas, including 485 already destroyed sites, places of worship and sacred sites; underlines the responsibility of all parties to protect cultural heritage in line with international conventions; 51. Calls on Ukraine to continue the approximation of labour standards, in particular as regards freedom of assembly and social dialogue, and encourages Ukraine to continue aligning its national labour and social legislation with EU standards, particularly in the areas of employment, social policy and equal opportunities; calls on the Commission to provide additional support to advance this progress; emphasises the need for broad consultations with trade unions and civil society and recommends that the expertise of the International Labour Organization on the matter be taken into account; Regional cooperation and good neighbourly relations 52. Welcomes Ukraine’s active participation in regional initiatives, such as its leadership in the Eastern Partnership Civil Society Forum and the coordination of cross-border projects with EU Member States; 53. Welcomes the recent joint communication from the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy entitled ‘The European Union’s strategic approach to the Black Sea region’(4) and in particular the opportunities for Ukraine to contribute meaningfully within this framework; encourages Ukraine’s continued active participation in the Eastern Partnership and the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly as an ‘integration leader’ that champions European values and reforms across the region; 54. Welcomes and encourages any efforts by Ukraine and the EU Member States to address unresolved aspects of historic bilateral and regional relations, for example the Volhynia massacre, in the spirit of true and sincere reconciliation, and with respect for the EU values of human dignity and good neighbourly relations, as well as a critical assessment of historical events; believes that with the good will of all parties concerned, a patient process of reconciliation will be approached constructively aiming at mutual understanding; welcomes, in this context, the ongoing talks between the Polish and Ukrainian authorities, which have led to the resumption of the excavation of graves of Polish citizens on Ukrainian territory in April 2025; hopes for the process to be continued with the clear aim of providing the victims with a dignified burial and remembrance; 55. Is deeply concerned about the recent discovery of intelligence-gathering activities by Hungarian security agencies in the south-western Zakarpattia region of Ukraine; expresses regret at the Hungarian Government’s systematic policies aimed at undermining Ukraine’s self-defence efforts and exploiting issues related to the Hungarian minority in Ukraine for political gain, thereby hindering Ukraine’s progress towards EU integration; Socio-economic reforms 56. Welcomes the implementation by Ukraine of the Priority Action Plan for 2023-2024 and the adoption of the legislation necessary to reform the Economic Security Bureau of Ukraine allowing it to combat tax evasion and economic crime more effectively; 57. Recalls the adoption of the Law on Local Public Service in 2023 and encourages the Ukrainian Government to adopt a systemic approach to forthcoming public administration reforms by establishing a clear vision and structured implementation strategy; emphasises the need to build up the institutional and administrative capacity required to secure the long-term success and impact of the accession-related reforms, not only in legislation, but also in practice; welcomes the recent adoption by the Verkhovna Rada of Draft Law No. 8222, which standardises the remuneration system for civil servants, aiming to improve governance efficiency while aligning it with European standards for public service management; 58. Encourages Ukraine to make progress on the approval of the amendments to the law on local state administration, including draft law No. 4298 with a view to aligning local governance reforms with EU standards; calls for a balanced legal framework for administrative supervision that respects the principle of proportionality and the European Charter of Local Self-Government, while safeguarding the competences, prerogatives and self-governing functions of local authorities; reiterates its call for the formal introduction of legal personality for local and regional public authorities; 59. Calls for continuous progress in decentralisation reform and the strengthening of self-governance on the local level; welcomes the launching of the Phase III of EU and Member States supported U-LEAD, which is focused on enhancing local self-government and fostering a resilient recovery at the local and regional levels; stresses the importance of ensuring that any future constitutional or institutional reforms, including electoral and decentralisation reforms, are conducted transparently, inclusively, and in line with Venice Commission recommendations; 60. Welcomes Ukraine’s achievement of key milestones and calls on Ukraine to continue making progress in the implementation of the Ukraine Plan, pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2024/792, while upholding the values and standards upon which it is based; stresses the need for the Commission to maintain conditionality, particularly regarding pillar III of the Facility, to ensure sustainability and accountability in the reform process; underscores that the strong momentum in the implementation of reforms is driven by the broad societal consensus and the conditionality of the Ukraine Facility; 61. Welcomes the continued support for civil society organisations through the Ukraine Facility’s Civil Society Window and encourages Ukraine to ensure that financial reporting requirements do not unduly restrict the activities of civil society organisations; underlines the importance of meaningful engagement with civil society and local authorities to ensure effective implementation and quality reforms under the Ukraine plan; encourages Ukraine’s judicial authorities to strengthen existing mechanisms, including through judicial action, to protect civil society activists; urges Ukraine to ensure that financial reporting requirements and the regulation of beneficial ownership of legal entities does not unduly affect the functioning and independence of civil society organisations; welcomes the continued support for civil society organisations through the Ukraine Facility’s Civil-Society Window; 62. Underlines that Ukraine’s reconstruction must be closely linked with its EU accession reforms and guided by principles of social fairness, sustainability, transparency and local ownership; stresses, furthermore, that Ukraine’s reconstruction must be rooted in robust rule of law, transparent governance and democratic inclusion; emphasises that judicial reform, anti-corruption efforts and public administration improvements are not only conditions for EU accession but also fundamental to attracting investment and restoring trust among Ukraine’s partners and citizens; calls for the integration of gender-sensitive approaches in all reconstruction efforts, including increased representation of women and minorities in decision-making processes; calls on the Ukrainian Government to ensure transparency in the implementation of ‘RebuildUkraine’, and with respect to the consultation and participation of civil society and at-risk groups in society, in particular as regards respect for fundamental rights and rule of law, as well as non-discriminatory distribution and use of EU funds; 63. Highlights the essential role played by the EU’s Ukraine Facility and the Extraordinary Revenue Acceleration Loan programme, which together provide over EUR 30 billion in 2025 in support of Ukraine’s public services, macro-financial stability and reform agenda; calls for continued and enhanced financial support for Ukraine in 2026 and 2027, including through a new macro-financial assistance package to meet Ukraine’s expected EUR 39 billion budget shortfall; notes, in addition, that Ukraine’s financial and economic resilience remains a core prerequisite for sustaining its defensive capacity and reform process; calls, therefore, for solutions to be considered to alleviate Ukraine’s foreign debt burden; 64. Takes note of the US-Ukraine economic partnership agreement on critical minerals and acknowledges the agreement’s affirmation of long-term US support for Ukraine’s security and reconstruction, and notes the intention, expressed in the agreement, to safeguard Ukraine’s EU accession process and related obligations, and to ensure compatibility with Ukraine’s commitments to international financial institutions or other official creditors; calls on the Commission to invite both parties to further clarify how the provisions intended to safeguard Ukraine’s EU integration path will be implemented, and to report regularly on their compatibility with Union law; considers it essential that the exploitation of minerals under this agreement fully respect high social and ecological standards and that compliance is ensured through robust control mechanisms; expects, furthermore, Ukraine to fully incorporate relevant EU environmental legislation, including the Water Framework Directive(5) and the Directive on the management of waste from extractive industries(6), into its national legal framework; 65. Recalls that EU enlargement must ensure that accession does not result in the exploitation of candidate countries’ natural resources or contribute to social inequality and environmental degradation; 66. Welcomes Ukraine’s progress in partially adopting animal welfare legislation, albeit with significant delays to the commitments made under the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area; encourages Ukraine to make further progress in adopting Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2005(7) on the protection of animals during transport, taking into account the ongoing revision of this legislation within the EU, which is crucial for meeting EU production standards and facilitating increased exports of animal-based products to the EU; calls for the EU and its Member States to provide Ukraine with financial and technical assistance in this regard; 67. Highlights the resilience and importance of the agricultural sector (19 % of GDP, 53 % of goods exports) but underlines the need to diversify value chains and the benefit of swiftly adopting EU phytosanitary standards; underlines the importance of environmental safeguards in ensuring the green recovery of Ukraine; calls on the Commission to further support Ukraine with the implementation of Environmental Impact Assessment procedures, in particular in the forestry and agriculture sectors, and Strategic Environmental Assessment procedures; calls, furthermore, on the Commission to further support Ukraine in building administrative capacity for the full implementation of the EU environmental acquis, including public participation in decision-making, and in aligning its legislation with the Renewable Energy Directive(8), in particular the sustainability criteria for bioenergy; 68. Calls on the Verkhovna Rada and the Ukrainian Government to amend Law No. 12089, which allows the legalisation of land ownership illegally withdrawn from the state, including forests and water bodies, to private individuals, which is not in line with EU acquis as the law in its current form includes legal uncertainties that will make the return of such land to the state impossible; Energy, the environment, sustainable development and connectivity 69. Welcomes the substantial progress made on energy sector reforms and Ukraine’s alignment with the objectives of the European Green Deal and encourages Ukraine not to backtrack in this regard; underlines the need to further bolster Ukraine’s energy security by deepening its integration into the EU energy market – including through the synchronisation of Ukraine’s electricity grid with continental Europe and enhanced cooperation on gas storage and supply – as well as by accelerating the deployment of renewable energy sources and energy efficiency measures; stresses that strengthening the resilience of critical energy infrastructure remains key to Ukraine’s economic stability and strategic autonomy; 70. Underscores that Ukraine has substantial potential as a provider of energy and energy-intensive products to the rest of Europe; encourages, therefore, Ukraine to continue developing energy interconnections with neighbouring Member States and regional partners, such as the Republic of Moldova, with a view to further integration in the EU energy market; recognises that Russia’s war of aggression has targeted and destroyed relevant networks and plants; urges Ukraine, therefore, to use reconstruction to build back better, using the most climate-friendly technologies and processes wherever possible, investing in renewable energy sources and energy-efficiency, and minimising the impact on the environment throughout the production chain; welcomes the Commission’s continued engagement in this area to support Ukraine’s energy sector reform, including reconstruction and green transition; calls for the advancement of the implementation of existing commitments under the Ukraine Plan and the Energy Community packages, including the unbundling of regional energy distribution companies; 71. Encourages Ukraine to explore the most cost-effective and reliable solutions for Ukraine’s energy sector, following Russia’s attacks on its energy infrastructure, for example by replacing, to the extent possible given the ongoing war, its fossil fuel power plants with decentralised and sustainable energy technologies; calls on the Commission and the Ukrainian authorities to strategically use the funds under the Ukraine Facility to prioritise investments in renewable energy sources, which are critical to ensure long-term energy security, environmental sustainability and economic resilience both in Ukraine and in the rest of the continent; 72. Expresses grave concern over Russia’s detrimental influence within the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), despite its repeated violations of the IAEA’s core principles of nuclear safety and non-interference; calls for the EU and its Member States to advocate for greater scrutiny of Russia’s role within the IAEA and to explore reforms to ensure that aggressor states cannot undermine the neutrality and credibility of international nuclear oversight; 73. Underlines that the Russian war of aggression amounts to an ecocide that has caused severe and long-lasting damage to Ukraine’s environment, including the destruction of ecosystems, contamination of water and soil, and the targeting of industrial and energy infrastructure; considers their international recognition as war crimes crucial to ensure full legal accountability for Russia and consequent compensation for Ukraine and calls for a comprehensive environmental recovery strategy to be supported by the EU as part of Ukraine’s reconstruction; calls for the EU and its Member States to give full support to all initiatives documenting the environmental destruction caused by Russia’s war and to back efforts for accountability and compensation in foreign jurisdictions; 74. Commends Ukraine for adopting its national energy and climate plan, and coordinating and planning energy and climate policies by 2030, with specific targets including a significant reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and an increased share of renewable energy; supports the ongoing efforts of the Energy Efficiency Fund and the newly established Decarbonisation Fund; calls for the EU and the Member States to ensure the financial sustainability of these instruments, particularly in the context of reconstruction and integration of renewables in housing; encourages Ukraine to integrate the just transition principle into energy reforms to mitigate social impact and support vulnerable groups; 75. Urges the Commission and Member States to include nuclear safety as a central component of Ukraine’s recovery and EU integration strategy, ensuring alignment with the EU acquis on nuclear energy and radiation protection under the Euratom framework; supports the strengthening of Ukraine’s nuclear safety and radiological emergency response capabilities as a central component of Ukraine’s recovery and EU integration strategy, including through technical and financial assistance from the EU and international partners; calls for the establishment of an EU-led initiative to reinforce nuclear security, safeguard critical infrastructure, and prevent radiological incidents stemming from Russian aggression; expresses grave concerns at attempts by the Russian Federation to de facto annex Ukrainian critical infrastructure including credible public reports that it intends to sever the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP) from the Ukrainian electricity grid and forcibly integrate it into the Russian energy system, which would violate Ukraine’s sovereignty and international law and pose a significant risk to nuclear safety; urges the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of all Russian military personnel and equipment from the premises of the ZNPP and all other nuclear sites in Ukraine and calls on the IAEA to publicly and unequivocally oppose any such plans; stresses that the integrity and resilience of Ukraine’s nuclear infrastructure is not solely a national issue, but a shared European responsibility; calls for coordinated contingency planning and increased cross-border cooperation among EU Member States to respond to potential nuclear threats emanating from Russian actions in Ukraine; 76. Urges Ukraine to effectively fight illegal logging in accordance with sustainable forestry management and environmental protection standards, such as illegal logging in the primeval Carpathian forests; calls for the EU to contribute to the prevention of illegal logging in connection with the unlawful Svydovets ski resort project; encourages Ukraine to invest in ecologically and environmentally safe and sustainable tourist infrastructure; 77. Calls on the Commission to assist Ukraine in maintaining progress towards a high degree of sufficiency of its Emerald Network concerning the Areas of Special Conservation Interest; 78. Welcomes the fact that EU-oriented exports accounted for 63 % of total exports in 2024, up from 42 % in 2021, reflecting successful trade re-orientation; 79. Notes the strategic importance of developing and expanding railway corridors linking Ukraine with the EU through the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T), serving both civilian and military logistical purposes as part of a broader dual-use infrastructure strategy; encourages continued efforts to align Ukraine’s digital and transport standards with those of the EU, thereby facilitating trade, mobility and secure communication; stresses that improved connectivity will support Ukraine’s economic recovery and integration; 80. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to allocate all the necessary funds to enhance intended transport connectivity and resilience in Ukraine up to 2050, including the further updating of the TEN-T maps; welcomes the successful development and implementation of the Solidarity Lanes, which have enabled Ukraine to bypass Russia’s Black Sea blockade and export a variety of goods to global markets via the neighbouring EU Member States and Moldova; commends the fact that, despite the war atrocities incurred and the significant drop in its grain production, Ukraine played a key role in preventing a global food crisis, as via the ‘Grain from Ukraine’ humanitarian food programme, launched by President Zelenskyy in 2022, more than 170 000 tonnes of wheat have been provided to countries experiencing the worst food crises, particularly in Africa; notes that the vast majority of Ukraine’s grain exports are destined for developing countries; 81. Acknowledges the progress of Ukraine’s integration into EU transport and digital connectivity initiatives and highlights the importance of alignment with the EU acquis in these areas; welcomes in particular the steps taken to include Ukraine in the EU’s free roaming area, eliminating mobile roaming charges between Ukraine and the EU for citizens and businesses; 82. Underlines the importance of strengthening connectivity, interoperability, and the capacity of digital and IT systems between the EU and Ukraine in line with the Association Agreement; calls for continued efforts to harmonise digital policies, expand cybersecurity cooperation, and ensure resilient and secure digital infrastructure; welcomes, in this regard, the conclusion of a working arrangement in December 2023 between the European Union Agency for Cybersecurity and the Ukrainian cybersecurity authorities; On accession negotiations 83. Recalls the decision of the European Council of 14–15 December 2023 to open accession negotiations with Ukraine, marking a historic milestone on Ukraine’s path towards EU membership; commends the swift convening of the first EU-Ukraine Intergovernmental Accession Conference on 25 June 2024, which officially launched the negotiation process and welcomes Commissioner Kos’s assessment that all screenings could be completed by autumn 2025; 84. Recognises Ukraine’s significant reforms and commitment and therefore recommends that the Commission swiftly open negotiating clusters with Ukraine to advance the country’s EU membership bid at the fastest pace possible, subject to its continued implementation of the EU acquis and the completion of the reforms it has undertaken; underlines that accession negotiations should follow a clear and transparent path, guided by objective and measurable criteria; stresses that these must include in-depth reforms in all fundamental areas and the functioning of stable institutions that uphold democracy, the rule of law, human rights, and particularly the respect for and protection of minorities; underscores the Commission’s recommendations for the coming year; 85. Calls on the Hungarian Government and the Member States to act in good faith when resolving any issues similar to those related to the Ukrainian Law on National Minorities, and to refrain from using such issues as a reason to block Ukraine’s accession to the EU; calls therefore on the Hungarian Government to no longer block the start of the first clusters of negotiations and allow Ukraine and its neighbour Moldova to continue progressing together on their path towards EU membership; 86. Recalls that the enlargement process must not be instrumentalised to settle bilateral disputes or delay a merit-based approach, and that such issues should be resolved independently of the accession track and through constructive dialogue and genuine cooperation; recalls that excessive delays on the path toward full EU membership risk undermining both public support and the political resolve within the candidate country; 87. calls, in preparation for negotiations, for continuous EU support, particularly in the form of expert assistance to offset any administrative shortcomings resulting from ongoing aggression against Ukraine; urges the EU, furthermore, to provide technical assistance to help Ukraine meet all accession requirements efficiently; regrets the decision by the US Government to withdraw funding from the US Agency for International Development (USAID), which has already directly affected support in Ukraine for critical reform processes, including those related to the rule of law, anti-corruption, public financial management, economic development, energy security and the delivery of humanitarian assistance; welcomes the efforts by the Commission and international partners to address the most urgent gaps left by this withdrawal of funding; 88. Stresses, before Ukraine’s EU accession, the need for increased EU support to accelerate Ukraine’s integration through targeted financial and technical assistance programmes and underlines that both Ukraine and the EU would benefit from progressive integration of the country into EU policies and programmes, alongside the formal accession negotiations; 89. Notes that the complexity of Ukraine’s EU integration, due to its size and the ongoing war, presents challenges in key areas such as agriculture, and necessitates significant institutional and financial reforms within the EU to ensure its capacity to absorb Ukraine; calls, therefore, for the EU and its Member States to proactively address these challenges, clearly communicate the benefits of Ukraine’s integration to EU citizens, find sustainable and equitable solutions for sensitive sectors, and pursue necessary internal reforms in parallel with the ongoing accession negotiations; calls on the Commission to support the sectors most exposed to the impacts of trade liberalisation in the context of Ukraine’s accession; notes, at the same time, following the experience of previous rounds of enlargement, that there may be a need for transition periods in certain specific sectors in which the full acquis does not yet apply in order to allow current Member States to adapt; reiterates its call on the Member States to demonstrate a clear and unequivocal political commitment towards the enlargement process and not to misuse it to settle bilateral disputes, which should be resolved independently of the accession track; 90. Repeats its calls to enhance the EU’s capacity to act by reforming its decision-making, including through the introduction of qualified majority voting in the Council on the intermediate steps in the accession process, in particular at the start of negotiations and the opening and closing of individual negotiating clusters and chapters; o 91. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the President, Government and Parliament of Ukraine, the governments and parliaments of the Member States, the Council and the Commission.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Legal notice - Privacy policy |