European Parliament resolution of 11 September 2025 on the detention of EU citizens in the occupied areas of Cyprus (2025/2860(RSP))

P10_TA(2025)0192 RC-B10-0371/2025

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the European Court of Human Rights judgment of 18 December 1996 in the case of Loizidou v Turkey (15318/89),

–  having regard to the ongoing occupation of Cyprus by Türkiye, the UN parameters for the solution of the Cyprus problem, all the relevant resolutions of the UN Security Council on Cyprus and the 1977 and 1979 High-Level Agreements,

–  having regard to Rules 150(5) and 136(4) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas the occupying regime, which is a result of the Turkish invasion of 1974 and is subordinate to Türkiye, is illegal and not internationally recognised;

B.  whereas, on 19 July 2025, five Greek Cypriot EU citizens – Antonis Louka, Andreas Kyprianou, Annie Kyprianou, Niki Gregoriou and Gregoris Gregoriou – were unlawfully detained and illegally charged by the Turkish military occupying regime while visiting their property in the village of Galatia;

C.  whereas, on 10 September 2025, three out of the five Greek Cypriot citizens were released on bail by the unrecognised “military court”, yet they remain in the occupied areas and cannot return to their homes;

D.  whereas despite the absence of credible evidence, their detention has been repeatedly extended by an unrecognised military ‘court’ in the occupied areas;

E.  whereas reports indicate that the detainees have suffered weight loss, severe health issues and lack of adequate medical treatment while in custody;

F.  whereas this politically motivated act constitutes a grave violation of their fundamental rights, undermines the rule of law within the European Union’s own territory and sets a dangerous precedent;

G.  whereas the detentions have been condemned across the political spectrum, including by prominent Turkish Cypriots, who stressed that such actions constitute political retaliation and undermine trust and the prospects for reunification;

H.  whereas the Government of the Republic of Cyprus has strongly condemned the detentions as deliberate acts of intimidation to terminate the legal action against usurpation, has submitted complaints to the UN and the EU, and is currently examining the possibility of initiating proceedings before the European Court of Human Rights;

1.  Strongly condemns the unlawful and politically motivated detention of five Greek Cypriot citizens by the Turkish military occupying regime and calls for their immediate and unconditional release;

2.  Condemns the occupying regime’s disregard for every notion of justice and its attempt at abduction and hostage-taking to escalate intimidation, and to target and influence those who attempt to visit their ancestral properties or appeal to the ‘Immovable Property Commission’ in the occupied areas;

3.  Urges Türkiye to provide the detainees with access to immediate medical care;

4.  Urges the Commission and the European External Action Service to take all necessary measures, including considering punitive measures, to secure their release;

5.  Calls on Türkiye to fully respect human rights enshrined in international law;

6.  Condemns Türkiye’s continued illegal occupation of the northern part of Cyprus, now in its 51st year, as a serious breach of international law and an obstacle to peace, stability and EU-Türkiye relations;

7.  Reiterates that the European Union has a moral and legal duty to support the Republic of Cyprus and its citizens, who are also EU citizens;

8.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the VP/HR, and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of the Republic of Türkiye.

European Parliament resolution of 11 September 2025 on the case of Victoire Ingabire in Rwanda (2025/2861(RSP))

P10_TA(2025)0193 RC-B10-0392/2025

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to its previous resolutions on Rwanda and the case of Victoire Ingabire,

–  having regard to Rules 150(5) and 136(4) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas Victoire Ingabire, political opposition leader and president of the DALFA-Umurinzi party, was arrested on 19 June 2025 in Kigali on charges of forming a criminal group and planning to incite public disorder; whereas she denies these charges, which appear linked to an existing case against fellow party members and journalist Théoneste Nsengimana, who were arrested in 2021 following their participation in a training session on peaceful strategies to resist authoritarianism;

B.  whereas Ingabire was imprisoned after an unfair trial in 2010, before being pardoned in September 2018; whereas the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights (AfCHPR) ruled in 2017 that Rwanda violated Ingabire’s freedom of expression and right to a fair trial;

C.  whereas the actions of the Rwandan authorities against Victoire Ingabire are part of a broader crackdown against political opposition figures; whereas since 2017, five members of Ingabire’s FDU-Inkingi party have died or disappeared; whereas civil society and the media in Rwanda operate under severe threats and restrictions;

1.  Strongly condemns the arrest of Victoire Ingabire on 19 June 2025 and expresses serious concern over the pattern of abuse against opposition parties and figures, journalists, civil society actors and dissidents, contrary to Rwanda’s international human rights obligations;

2.  Calls for the immediate and unconditional release of Victoire Ingabire and other opposition figures on trial for peacefully exercising their fundamental rights, and demands that politically motivated charges be dropped;

3.  Underlines that Ingabire’s ongoing trial is marred by serious irregularities; calls on Rwanda to accredit Ingabire’s selected legal team; urges Rwanda to accept the AfCHPR’s jurisdiction, fully comply with its 2019 order for reparations, and respect international human rights mechanisms;

4.  Urges the Rwandan authorities to end the harassment, arbitrary arrest and imprisonment of opposition members, journalists and civil society, to guarantee press and media freedom, and to offer space for political debate and democratic participation, including ensuring free and fair elections; expresses grave concern at the unresolved deaths and enforced disappearances of opposition figures, and demands prompt, independent and transparent investigation following international standards;

5.  Calls on EU and Member States’ delegations in Kigali to visit those arbitrarily detained and to monitor judicial procedures; calls on the EU and Member States to raise the crackdown on political opposition and compliance with human rights in political dialogue at the highest level with the Rwandan Government and ensure that cooperation with Rwanda is consistent with the promotion of human rights and democracy, including fair trial standards;

6.  Calls on the Commission to review existing financial and other support, such as the Justice and Accountability Programme, to Rwandan state institutions implicated in arbitrary detention, torture or unfair trials;

7.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the VP/HR, the Council, the Commission, the Member States, the African Union, the UN and the Government and Parliament of Rwanda.

European Parliament resolution of 11 September 2025 on the case of Abdoul Aziz Goma, arbitrarily detained in Togo (2025/2862(RSP))

P10_TA(2025)0194 RC-B10-0377/2025

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to Rules 150(5) and 136(4) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas Abdoul Aziz Goma, a dual Irish-Togolese citizen, was arrested and detained in Togo in December 2018 on charges of assisting local protestors with pre-election protests;

B.  whereas in February 2025, he was convicted in a one-day trial and sentenced to 10 years in prison, alongside 13 others, amid serious concerns about the fairness of the proceedings;

C.  whereas Mr Goma has been subjected to severe torture and held incommunicado for long periods, has endured over six years of inhumane pretrial detention, and on 27 August 2025, began a hunger strike in protest against his prison conditions;

D.  whereas in 2023, the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention concluded that Mr Goma’s rights to freedom of assembly, association and fair trial were being violated;

E.  whereas Mr Goma’s health has gravely deteriorated during detention, with progressive neurological damage, severe sciatica and reduced mobility, requiring urgent medical attention;

F.  whereas the civil prison in Lomé is extremely overcrowded; whereas these conditions, of inadequate space, food and medical treatment, fail to meet international standards; whereas in 2019, the UN Committee against Torture advised the Togolese authorities to close the prison;

G.  whereas arbitrarily detaining individuals, particularly civil society activists, undermines public trust in institutions and aggravates political tensions;

H.  whereas this case is symptomatic of severe democratic backsliding in Togo, exemplified by the 2024 constitutional changes;

I.  whereas growing Russian influence in the Sahel and West Africa is alarming;

1.  Strongly condemns the arbitrary arrest and prolonged incommunicado detention of and torture suffered by Abdoul Aziz Goma; expresses profound concern for his physical and psychological well-being;

2.  Urges the Togolese authorities to immediately and unconditionally release him, in line with the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention’s opinion; demands that his conviction be set aside, his safety guaranteed, and that the authorities facilitate his urgent medical evacuation;

3.  Underlines the need to ensure that detention conditions meet international human rights standards; calls for the Togolese authorities to reform their penitentiary system and end the practice of arbitrary pretrial imprisonment of political opponents;

4.  Insists that the right to freedom of assembly and expression be protected; urges the authorities to ensure adequate space for civil society to operate, including peaceful protestors and human rights defenders;

5.  Stresses that the arbitrary detention and torture of political opponents, human rights defenders and individuals perceived as critical of the government undermine the rule of law and democratic governance in Togo; calls for the immediate and unconditional release of all political prisoners;

6.  Calls for the EU and its Member States to use diplomatic channels to resolve this case and support efforts to strengthen judicial independence and the rule of law in Togo;

7.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, and the Government and Parliament of Togo.

Amendments adopted by the European Parliament on 11 September 2025 on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive (EU) 2015/2302 to make the protection of travellers more effective and to simplify and clarify certain aspects of the Directive (COM(2023)0905 – C9-0436/2023 – 2023/0435(COD))(1)

P10_TA(2025)0195 A10-0140/2025

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

Text proposed by the Commission   Amendment Amendment 1 Proposal for a directive Recital 2 (2)  In order to pursue those objectives, Directive (EU) 2015/2302 broadened the definition of the term ‘package’ compared to Directive 90/314/EEC. Directive (EU) 2015/2302 further specified existing rights of travellers and introduced new ones, such as the right for travellers to terminate a package travel contract without termination fees, under certain conditions, in the event of unavoidable and extraordinary circumstances. In addition, Directive (EU) 2015/2302 created the new concept of ‘linked travel arrangement’, which encompassed bookings carried out at one point of sale and bookings at different points of sale which a trader ‘facilitates in a targeted manner’. Linked travel arrangements are largely treated like stand-alone services, but payments received by a trader facilitating a linked travel arrangement are to be protected against such trader’s insolvency. Directive (EU) 2015/2302 aimed to ensure transparency by obliging traders to inform travellers on the nature of travel product offered to them and on the associated rights through standard information forms contained in Annexes I and II to that Directive. (2)  In order to pursue those objectives, Directive (EU) 2015/2302 broadened the definition of the term ‘package’ compared to Directive 90/314/EEC. Directive (EU) 2015/2302 further specified existing rights of travellers and introduced new ones, such as the right for travellers to terminate a package travel contract without termination fees, under certain conditions, in the event of unavoidable and extraordinary circumstances. Amendment 2 Proposal for a directive Recital 3 (3)  While, overall, Directive (EU) 2015/2302 has worked well, several challenges have emerged since the start of its application on 1 July 2018. The COVID-19 pandemic and related government measures had a significant impact on both the travel industry and travellers and exposed certain weaknesses in prevailing business models and showed that specific provisions of the Directive could be clarified. (3)  While, overall, Directive (EU) 2015/2302 has worked well, several challenges have emerged since the start of its application on 1 July 2018. The COVID-19 pandemic and related government measures had a significant impact on both the travel industry and travellers and exposed certain weaknesses in prevailing business models and showed that specific provisions of the Directive could be clarified. Moreover, despite the efforts linked to the Directive, to ensure transparency and provide clear information to travellers, a lack of uniformity in communicating information to travellers about their rights has persisted. Amendment 3 Proposal for a directive Recital 5 (5)  While, overall, the definition of ‘package’ is considered to have been effective, the definition of and the rules on linked travel arrangements, as well as their delimitation from packages, should be clarified and simplified. Such clarification and simplification of the definitions and concepts ‘package’ and ‘linked travel arrangement’ should increase legal certainty for all parties, while making the protection of travellers more effective, and ensuring a level playing field for traders. At the same time, the number of information forms to be used by traders when informing travellers on their rights should be reduced. (5)  While, overall, the definition of ‘package’ is considered to have been effective, the definition of and the rules on linked travel arrangements have created more complexity and legal uncertainty, and are rarely used in practice. Therefore, the definition of a 'package' should be clarified and simplified, and the provisions on linked travel arrangements should be deleted from Directive (EU) 2015/2302. Such clarification and simplification of the definition and concept of ‘package’ and the deletion of references to the concept of ‘linked travel arrangement’ should increase legal certainty for all parties, while making the protection of travellers more effective, and ensuring a level playing field for traders. At the same time, the number of information forms to be used by traders when informing travellers on their rights should be reduced. With the deletion of the concept of “linked travel arrangements”, Annex II should subsequently be deleted. Amendment 4 Proposal for a directive Recital 5 a (new) (5a)  In the context of online bookings, the term ‘invites’ should be understood as any action by the trader that actively encourages or prompts the traveller to enter into an additional contract for a different type of travel service. Such actions may include, but are not limited to, presenting the traveller with targeted offers during the booking process, or providing hyperlinks or prompts to book further services. Amendment 5 Proposal for a directive Recital 6 (6)  The principle underlying the definition of ‘package’ should remain that there is a close link between different travel services booked for the purpose of the same trip or holiday. In order to ensure that there is no overlap between the definition of ‘package’ and ‘linked travel arrangement’ and to eliminate the difficulties in distinguishing between packages and linked travel arrangements, bookings of different types of travel services for the same trip or holiday at one point of sale where the travel services have been selected before the traveller concludes a first contract should be considered as packages in the same way as travel services booked at one point of sale within a short period of time. In both cases, there is a close link between the bookings of travel services. Therefore, the definition of ‘package’, should cover both situations, while bookings made on the occasion of a single visit of or contact with one point of sale should be removed from the definition of linked travel arrangement. (6)  The principle underlying the definition of ‘package’ should remain that there is a close link between different travel services booked for the purpose of the same trip or holiday. Bookings of different types of travel services for the same trip or holiday at one point of sale where the travel services have been selected before the traveller concludes a first contract should be considered as packages in the same way as travel services booked at one point of sale within a short period of time. In both cases, there is a close link between the bookings of travel services. Therefore, the definition of ‘package’, should cover both situations. Amendment 6 Proposal for a directive Recital 7 (7)  In the context of bookings made within a short period of time at one point of sale, it is appropriate to replace the rather vague criterion of ‘a single visit or contact’. Therefore, bookings of different types of travel services for the same trip of holiday made within three hours should always be considered as packages. The same should apply where, before the completion of a first booking, a trader invites a traveller to book additional services for the same trip or holiday after completing the first booking, and where subsequent bookings take place within 24 hours after the conclusion of the first contract. (7)  In the context of bookings made within a short period of time at one point of sale, it is appropriate to replace the rather vague criterion of ‘a single visit or contact’. Therefore, bookings of different types of travel services for the same trip or holiday where, before the traveller agrees to pay for a first travel service, a trader actively invites a traveller to book one or more additional services for the same trip or holiday within 24 hours of agreeing to pay for the first service, should be considered as packages. For the purpose of this Directive, a trader should be considered to be actively inviting a traveller to book a service when it optimises the offer for sale in question or promotes such offer. Amendment 7 Proposal for a directive Recital 8 (8)  The definition of package formed through linked online booking processes in Article 3(2)(b)(v) of Directive (EU) 2015/2302, which required that the traveller’s name, payment details and email address are all transmitted from one trader to another trader, has proved to be too narrow. Therefore, it is appropriate to consider as ‘package’ bookings of different types of travel services for the same trip or holiday where the trader that is party to a first contract transfers to a trader that is party to a second or further contract alternatively the traveller’s name, payment details, email address or any other of the traveller’s personal data. Such transfer of personal data indicates a close link between the bookings/contracts so that the criterion of 24 hours for the second booking is not indispensable and should be removed. (8)  The definition of package formed through linked online booking processes in Article 3(2)(b)(v) of Directive (EU) 2015/2302, which required that the traveller’s name, payment details and email address are all transmitted from one trader to another trader, has proved to be too narrow. Therefore, it is appropriate to consider as a 'package' bookings of different types of travel services for the same trip or holiday where the trader that is party to a first contract transfers the traveller's personal data to a trader that is party to a second or further contract. Such a transfer of personal data should enable the traders involved to establish that the same traveller is a party to the relevant contracts and could include, for example, the traveller’s name, payment details, email address or telephone number. The transfer of personal data indicates a close link between the bookings/contracts. Amendment 8 Proposal for a directive Recital 9 (9)  The definition of ‘a linked travel arrangement’ should cover situations where a trader that is party to a first contract and receives payments from or on behalf of the traveller invites a traveller to book additional types of travel services for the same trip or holiday. In this context, the trader that is party to a first contract should obtain insolvency protection. Furthermore, in order to make sure that travellers fully benefit from the rules on insolvency protection and for traders to know that they are subject to this obligation, it is appropriate that the information forms on linked travel arrangements recommend to travellers to record the invitation and the additional booking, for instance through screenshots, and to inform the trader with whom a first contract was concluded that a contract on an additional type of travel service has been concluded for the same trip or holiday within 24 hours following the invitation from the trader. The trader should be obliged to make available to travellers a facility, such as an email address or a website, where travellers can register such information and shall acknowledge receipt of such information. deleted Amendment 9 Proposal for a directive Recital 10 (10)  Regarding packages where, for example, accommodation is combined with other tourist services, but which do not contain any carriage of passengers, the general criterion of ‘a significant proportion’ of the value of the combination, applying to tourist services as referred to in Article 3(1)(d), should be replaced with the more specific criterion of ‘at least 25%’ in order to increase legal certainty. (10)  Regarding packages where, for example, accommodation is combined with other tourist services, but which do not contain any carriage of passengers, the general criterion of ‘a significant proportion’ of the value of the combination, applying to tourist services as referred to in Article 3(1)(d), should be replaced with the more specific criterion of ‘at least 25%’ in order to increase legal certainty. It should be noted that different on-site activities that are provided as an intrinsic part of or typically associated with accommodation, regardless of their value, should not result in the creation of a package if these services are combined only with accommodation. Amendment 10 Proposal for a directive Recital 12 (12)  There are certain risks which are inherent in the business practice of requiring advance payments, in particular, in situations where organisers are obliged to refund significant amounts to travellers for cancelled trips within a short period of time. Therefore, it should be provided that downpayments, that is to say payments asked of travellers at the time of booking or shortly afterwards, should not be higher than 25% of the total price of the package, and that organisers or, where applicable, retailers should be prevented from requesting the payment of the remaining amount earlier than 28 days before the start of the package. At the same time, organisers and, where applicable, retailers should be able to request higher downpayments where this is necessary to ensure the organisation and proper performance of the package. The level of downpayments requested by organisers may be justified by advance payments to service providers, including where they belong to the same group of companies as the organiser, or the need to cover the organiser’s costs directly related to the organisation and performance of the package at the time of booking or shortly afterwards. This may, where applicable, include commissions requested by retailers. (12)  There are certain risks which are inherent in the business practice of requiring advance payments, in particular, in situations where organisers are obliged to refund significant amounts to travellers for cancelled trips within a short period of time. Therefore, it should be provided that downpayments, that is to say payments asked of travellers at the time of booking or shortly afterwards, should be set at an appropriate level. Downpayments may be subject to limitations based on national jurisdiction. Amendment 11 Proposal for a directive Recital 13 (13)  The level of downpayments should not require different calculations for each package but can be established for groups of packages that have similar characteristics regarding the necessity of downpayment. Organisers and, where relevant, retailers should continue to be obliged to inform travellers, before the conclusion of the contract, about the downpayments they request. deleted Amendment 12 Proposal for a directive Recital 14 (14)  Since the limitation of advance payments is not compatible with the concept of package travel gift boxes as referred to in Article 3(5)(b)(iv) of Directive (EU) 2015/2302 and packages booked less than 28 days before the start of the package, these two types of packages should be exempted from the limitation of advance payments introduced by this Directive. deleted Amendment 13 Proposal for a directive Recital 16 (16)  In certain situation voluntary vouchers to travellers can be a useful alternative to refunds. Vouchers can give more flexibility to organisers in particular if they are confronted with the obligation to make many refunds within a short period of time. At the same time, vouchers can be acceptable for travellers who do not need an instant refund, as long as there are specific legal guarantees. Therefore, clear rules on vouchers should be laid down which provide such guarantees. Those guarantees should include transparency on the voluntary nature and on the key characteristics of vouchers, as well as on travellers’ rights in relation to vouchers, for example, the fact that they are protected against the organiser’s insolvency and that travellers are entitled to an automatic refund where a voucher is not redeemed during its period of validity. Organisers may make vouchers more attractive, for example, by increasing the amount of the voucher compared to the traveller’s refund right. In such cases, insolvency protection should be limited to the amount of payments received from the traveller. (16)  In certain situations voluntary vouchers to travellers can be a useful alternative to refunds. Vouchers can give more flexibility to organisers in particular if they are confronted with the obligation to make many refunds within a short period of time. At the same time, vouchers can be acceptable for travellers who do not need an instant refund, as long as there are specific legal guarantees. Therefore, clear rules on vouchers should be laid down which provide such guarantees. Those guarantees should include transparency on the voluntary nature and on the key characteristics of vouchers, as well as on travellers’ rights in relation to vouchers, for example, the fact that they are protected against the organiser’s insolvency and that travellers are entitled to an automatic refund where a voucher is not redeemed during its period of validity. It should be possible for the voucher to be used for any services proposed by the organiser. Organisers should be able to make vouchers more attractive, for example, by increasing their value as compared to the traveller’s refund right. In such cases, insolvency protection should be limited to the amount of the traveller's refund rights. Amendment 14 Proposal for a directive Recital 16 a (new) (16a)  If a package has been combined by an organiser and is made up of services by two, or more, different travel service providers, the voucher should apply to the organiser where the package was booked and not be split up among different travel service providers that the organiser is cooperating with. Amendment 15 Proposal for a directive Recital 18 (18)  The multitude of conceivable situations that may give rise to the termination of a package travel contract due to unavoidable and extraordinary circumstances which significantly affect the performance of a package requires a case-by-case assessment, for instance, in light of the nature and the extent of such circumstances. It should be clarified that the termination of a contract is possible if it can be reasonably expected that its performance will be significantly affected by unavoidable and extraordinary circumstances. (18)  It should be clarified that the termination of a contract is possible if it can be reasonably expected that its performance will be significantly and objectively affected by unavoidable and extraordinary circumstances, which requires a case-by-case assessment. The assessment as to whether unavoidable and extraordinary circumstances will have significant and objective effects on the performance of the package should be based on a prediction, at the moment of the termination of the contract, of the likelihood that the unavoidable and extraordinary circumstances will have significant and objective effects on the performance of the package. Where a traveller terminates the contract, such an assessment should be made from the perspective of an average traveller who is reasonably well-informed and reasonably observant and circumspect, based on information available at the date of termination of the package travel contract in question. The effects of unavoidable and extraordinary circumstances occurring at the place of departure, destination, including its immediate vicinity, or affecting the journey to or from the destination, including the various places connected with the start and return of the trip in question, should be taken into account where they affect the performance of travel services included in the relevant package travel contract. Circumstances affecting only the journey to the destination or the return journey should not be taken into account if that journey is not part of the package travel contract, including the transport of the passenger to the agreed place of departure. Amendment 16 Proposal for a directive Recital 19 (19)  During the Covid-19 pandemic, different interpretations emerged regarding cancellation rights due to ‘unavoidable and extraordinary circumstances’ including in relation to the relevance of travel warnings. It is, therefore, appropriate to specify that official travel warnings for the travel destination issued by the authorities of the Member State of the traveller’s residence or departure or the country of destination, are important elements when assessing the justification of the termination of a contract. It should also be clarified that serious restrictions at the travel destination or applying after returning from the trip or holiday, such as quarantine requirements for a significant period, are also relevant when assessing the justification of the termination of a package travel contract. (19)  During the Covid-19 pandemic, different interpretations emerged regarding cancellation rights due to ‘unavoidable and extraordinary circumstances’ including in relation to the relevance of travel warnings. It is, therefore, appropriate to specify that official travel warnings for the travel destination issued by the authorities of the Member State of the traveller’s residence or departure or the country of destination, are important elements when assessing whether the termination of a contract is justified. Furthermore, the absence of official travel warnings should not prevent the existence of those circumstances and their effects on the performance of the package from being established. Unavoidable and extraordinary circumstances can cover not only circumstances which affect the performance of a package but also circumstances which, without preventing such performance, mean that the package cannot be performed without exposing the travellers concerned to risks to their health and safety. The relevance of such circumstances and their effects should be assessed objectively, while taking into account, where appropriate, the degree to which the travellers concerned are exposed to risk. The fact that, due to unavoidable and extraordinary circumstances, travellers will be subject to serious restrictions at the travel destination or at their place of departure, including quarantine requirements for a significant period, should also be assessed when considering whether a termination of contract is justified. Amendment 17 Proposal for a directive Recital 20 (20)  It should also be clarified that the 14-day refund period, which is triggered by the termination of the contract, applies regardless of whether the traveller specifically asks for a refund. (20)  It should also be clarified that the 14-day refund period, which is triggered by the termination of the contract, applies regardless of whether the traveller specifically asks for a refund. Furthermore, it should be specified that the organiser is to reimburse all payments made by or on behalf of the traveller in respect of the package. Amendment 18 Proposal for a directive Recital 21 a (new) (21a)  Under the conditions laid down in this Directive, Member States should define their insolvency protection systems applicable within their territories, including the associated procedures and the methods for providing information on insolvency protection through the most effective communication channels available. It is important to lay down that, as soon as an insolvency occurs, travellers should be provided with all necessary information to benefit from insolvency protection rights. Accordingly, the Member States should designate a relevant entity or entities, which will be responsible for providing the necessary information. The Commission should centralise the information related to those insolvency protection schemes and central contact points, and make it available to the public on its website. Amendment 19 Proposal for a directive Recital 22 (22)  In order to ensure effectiveness of insolvency protection for travellers at all times, it should be provided that the security is sufficient to cover costs for refunds and repatriations in cases where an insolvency occurs at a time when an organiser holds the highest amounts of payments. Any increases of those amounts due to a higher anticipated volume of packages sold in a given period should be taken into account. It should be clarified that Member States should supervise the insolvency protection of organisers and monitor the market for the provision of insolvency protection and that. If necessary, Member States should be able to require a second level of protection, such as a back-up fund. This may be relevant, for example, where insurance policies do not provide the required level of protection. Such back-up funds should normally be funded exclusively through contributions from organisers. It should be clarified that such measures can be co-financed by the Member States only in exceptional circumstances and reiterated that those provisions are without prejudice to the Union provisions on State aid insofar as such measures involve State aid. (22)  In order to ensure effectiveness of insolvency protection for travellers at all times, it should be provided that the security is sufficient to cover costs for refunds and repatriations in cases where an insolvency occurs at a time when an organiser holds the highest amounts of payments. Any increases of those amounts due to a higher anticipated volume of packages sold in a given period should be taken into account. It should be clarified that Member States should supervise the insolvency protection of organisers and monitor the market for the provision of insolvency protection. It should be clarified that such measures can be co-financed by the Member States only in exceptional circumstances and reiterated that those provisions are without prejudice to the Union provisions on State aid insofar as such measures involve State aid. Amendment 20 Proposal for a directive Recital 25 (25)  It is important that travellers are properly informed on their rights, are able to understand the information provided to them and have access to that information when they need it. Therefore, certain changes should be made regarding pre-contractual information requirements, the content of a package travel contract and the standard information forms set out in Annexes I and II to Directive (EU) 2015/2302. For example, the standard information forms in Annex I should specify the trader responsible for refunds for cancelled packages. The right to terminate a package travel contract without a fee due to unavoidable and extraordinary circumstances should be presented next to the possibility to cancel a package subject to a cancellation fee. In addition, organisers should be obliged to add the standard information form to the contract so that it is available to travellers after the conclusion of the contract, along with contact details of the relevant traders. (25)  It is important that travellers are properly informed on their rights, are able to understand the information provided to them and have access to that information when they need it. Therefore, certain changes should be made regarding pre-contractual information requirements, the content of a package travel contract and the standard information forms set out in Annexes I and II to Directive (EU) 2015/2302. For example, the standard information forms in Annex I should specify the trader responsible for refunds for cancelled packages. The right to terminate a package travel contract without a fee due to unavoidable and extraordinary circumstances should be presented next to the possibility to cancel a package subject to a cancellation fee. In addition, organisers should be obliged to add the standard information form to the contract so that it is available to travellers after the conclusion of the contract, along with contact details of the relevant traders. To ensure that travellers are properly informed about their rights, organisers should provide assistance accessible to travellers, especially vulnerable travellers, through a one-stop shop. Digital communication channels should be recognised as a key tool for providing up-to-date and personalised information about passenger rights at all times. This information should be provided automatically and proactively by organisers, particularly in the case of an event likely to have an impact on the package, in order to facilitate the flow of information to the traveller and the organiser. Digital communication channels should be prioritised, without adversely affecting passenger assistance provided at physical counters. Amendment 21 Proposal for a directive Recital 25 a (new) (25a)  Compliance with this Directive should be enforceable by means of the imposition of penalties and other enforcement measures. Member States should take all necessary measures to ensure that the provisions of this Directive are implemented, including by laying down effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties applicable to infringements of national provisions adopted pursuant to this Directive. Member States should also ensure respect for the ne bis in idem principle. When assessing the amount of fines, Member States should, in each individual case, take into account all relevant circumstances of the specific situation, with due regard in particular to the nature, gravity, scale and duration of the infringement and of its consequences and to the size of the provider, in particular if the provider is an SME, including start-ups. Amendment 22 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 1 Article 1 Article 1 Subject matter Subject matter The purpose of this Directive is to contribute to the proper functioning of the internal market and to the achievement of a high and as uniform as possible level of consumer protection by approximating certain aspects of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States in respect of contracts between travellers and traders relating to package travel and linked travel arrangements, as well as certain aspects of contracts between organisers of packages and service providers. The purpose of this Directive is to contribute to the proper functioning of the internal market and to the achievement of a high and as uniform as possible level of consumer protection by approximating and simplifying certain aspects of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States in respect of contracts between travellers and traders relating to package travel and certain aspects of contracts between organisers of packages and travel service providers, as well as of the specific information requirements in some cases not leading to the creation of a package. Amendment 23 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 This Directive applies to packages offered for sale or sold by traders to travellers and to linked travel arrangements facilitated by traders for travellers. This Directive applies to packages offered for sale or sold by traders to travellers. Amendment 24 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new) Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point a (2a)  in Article 2(2), point (a) is replaced by the following: (a)  packages and linked travel arrangements covering a period of less than 24 hours unless overnight accommodation is included; ‘(a) packages covering a period of less than 24 hours unless overnight accommodation is included;’ Amendment 25 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 b (new) Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point b (2b)  in Article 2(2), point (b) is replaced by the following: (b)  packages offered, and linked travel arrangements facilitated, occasionally and on a not-for-profit basis and only to a limited group of travellers; ‘(b) packages offered occasionally and on a ‘not-for-profit’ basis and only to a limited group of travellers;’ Amendment 26 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point 2 c (new) Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point c (2c)  in Article 2(2), point (c) is replaced by the following: (c)  packages and linked travel arrangements purchased on the basis of a general agreement for the arrangement of business travel between a trader and another natural or legal person who is acting for purposes relating to his trade, business, craft or profession. ‘(c) packages purchased for the arrangement of business travel between a trader and another natural or legal person who is acting for purposes relating to his trade, business, craft or profession.’ Amendment 27 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b – point i (i)  those services are purchased from a single point of sale and (i)  those services are purchased from a single point of sale and have been selected before the traveller agrees to pay, or –  have been selected before the traveller agrees to pay, –  other types of travel services are booked within 3 hours after the traveller agreed to pay for the first travel service, or –  other types of travel services are booked within 24 hours after the traveller agreed to pay for the first travel service and if, before the traveller agreed to pay for the first travel service, the trader invited the traveller to subsequently book one or more additional types of travel services, or Amendment 28 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b – point i a (new) (ia)   if, before the traveller agrees to pay for a first travel service, the trader actively invites the traveller to book one or more additional types of travel services at the same point of sale within 24 hours of agreeing to pay for the first service, or Amendment 29 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b – point ii (ii)  are offered, sold or paid at an inclusive or total price, regardless of any separate billing, or (ii)  offered, sold or paid at an inclusive or total price, regardless of any separate billing, or Amendment 30 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b – point iii (iii)  are advertised or sold under the term ‘package’ or under a similar term, or (iii)  advertised or sold under the term ‘package’ or under a similar term, or Amendment 31 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b – point iv (iv)  are combined after the conclusion of a contract by which a trader entitles the traveller to choose among a selection of different types of travel services, or (iv)  combined after the conclusion of a contract by which a trader entitles the traveller to choose among a selection of different types of travel services, or Amendment 32 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b – point v (v)  are purchased from separate traders through linked online booking processes where the traveller’s name, payment details, e-mail address or the traveller’s other personal data are transmitted from the trader with whom the first contract is concluded to another trader or other traders. (v)  purchased from separate traders through linked online booking processes where the traveller's personal data through which the traveller can be identified as a contracting party, are transmitted from the trader with whom the first contract is concluded to another trader or traders and a contract or contracts is or are concluded at the latest 24 hours after the confirmation of the booking of the first travel service with the latter trader or traders, Amendment 33 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b – point v a (new) (va)  or any other situation where the parties agree to consider the booked travel services as a package. Amendment 34 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 5 (b)  point 5 is replaced by the following: (b)  point 5 is deleted. ‘(5) linked travel arrangement’ means a combination of different types of travel services, not falling under the definition of a package in point 2, where, a trader which is party to a contract on the provision of a travel service and receives payments by or on behalf of a traveller invites a traveller to book additional type of travel service from another trader for the purpose of same trip or holiday and where a contract on the provision of an additional travel service is concluded at the latest 24 hours after the confirmation of the booking of the first contract.” Amendment 35 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b a (new) Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 7 (ba)  point 7 is replaced by the following: (7)  ‘trader’ means any natural person or any legal person, irrespective of whether privately or publicly owned, who is acting, including through any other person acting in his name or on his behalf, for purposes relating to his trade, business, craft or profession in relation to contracts covered by this Directive, whether acting in the capacity of organiser, retailer, trader facilitating a linked travel arrangement or as a travel service provider; ‘(7) ‘trader’ means any natural person or any legal person, irrespective of whether privately or publicly owned, who is acting, including through any other person acting in his name or on his behalf, for purposes relating to his trade, business, craft or profession in relation to contracts covered by this Directive, whether acting in the capacity of organiser, retailer, or as a travel service provider; Amendment 36 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b b (new) Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 12 (bb)  point 12 is replaced by the following: (12)  ‘unavoidable and extraordinary circumstances’ means a situation beyond the control of the party who invokes such a situation and the consequences of which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken; (12)  ‘unavoidable and extraordinary circumstances’ means a situation beyond the control of the party who invokes such a situation and the consequences of which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken, including inter alia war or conflict, other serious security problems such as terrorism, significant risks to human health such as the outbreak of a serious disease at the travel destination, or natural disasters such as floods, earthquakes or weather conditions which make it impossible to travel safely to the destination as agreed in the package travel contract; Amendment 37 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point -a (new) Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a – subpoint viii (-a)  in point (a), subpoint (viii) is replaced by the following: (viii)  whether the trip or holiday is generally suitable for persons with reduced mobility and, upon the traveller's request, precise information on the suitability of the trip or holiday taking into account the traveller's needs; ‘(viii) whether the trip or holiday is generally suitable for persons with a disability and reduced mobility and, upon the traveller's request, precise information on the accessibility and suitability of the trip or holiday taking into account the traveller's needs;’ Amendment 38 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point –a a (new) Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b (-aa)  point (b) is replaced by the following: (b)  the trading name and geographical address of the organiser and, where applicable, of the retailer, as well as their telephone number and, where applicable, e-mail address; ‘(b) the trading name and geographical address of the organiser and, where applicable, of the retailer, as well as their free of charge telephone number and functional e-mail address;’ Amendment 39 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point a Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point d (d)  the arrangements for payment, including any amount or percentage of the price which is to be paid as a down payment and the timing for payment of the balance, in accordance with Article 5a, or financial guarantees to be paid or provided by the traveller; ‘(d) the arrangements for payment, including via points or other currency reward systems and any amount or percentage of the price which is to be paid as a down payment and the timing for payment of the balance, or financial guarantees to be paid or provided by the traveller;’ Amendment 40 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point a a (new) Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point f (aa)  point (f) is replaced by the following: (f)  general information on passport and visa requirements, including approximate periods for obtaining visas and information on health formalities, of the country of destination; ‘(f) exhaustive general information on passport and visa requirements, including approximate periods for obtaining visas and information on health formalities, of the country of destination and transit, as well as changes occurring between the conclusion of the contract and its execution;’ Amendment 41 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point b a (new) Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point h a (new) (ba)  the following point is added: ‘(ha) information that the traveller is buying a package and an explanation of the protection given to travellers after the conclusion of the contract, as provided for in this Directive.’ Amendment 42 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 a (new) Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 5 – paragraph 3 (4a)  in Article 5, paragraph 3 is replaced by the following: 3.  The information referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall be provided in a clear, comprehensible and prominent manner. Where such information is provided in writing, it shall be legible. 3.  The information referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall be provided in a clear, comprehensible and prominent manner and in accessible formats in accordance with the accessibility requirements set out in Annex I to Directive (EU) 2019/882. Where such information is provided in writing, it shall be legible. Amendment 43 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 5a Article 5a Article 5a Payments Payments Member States shall ensure that, except for packages as defined in Article 3, point (2)(b)(iv), and packages booked less than 28 days before the start of the package, the organiser or, where applicable, the retailer shall not request downpayments exceeding 25% of the total price of the package and shall not request the remaining payment earlier than 28 days before the start of the package. The organiser, or where applicable, the retailer may request higher downpayments where this is necessary to ensure the organisation and the performance of the package. The downpayments may cover advance payments to providers of services included in the package and costs incurred by the organiser, or where applicable the retailer, specifically in relation to the organisation and performance of the package insofar as it is necessary to cover those costs at the time of booking. Member States may, in accordance with national provisions, introduce limitations on pre-payments. Amendment 44 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point -a (new) Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 7 – paragraph 1 (-a)  paragraph 1 is replaced by the following: 1.  Member States shall ensure that package travel contracts are in plain and intelligible language and, in so far as they are in writing, legible. At the conclusion of the package travel contract or without undue delay thereafter, the organiser or retailer shall provide the traveller with a copy or confirmation of the contract on a durable medium. The traveller shall be entitled to request a paper copy if the package travel contract has been concluded in the simultaneous physical presence of the parties. ‘1. Member States shall ensure that package travel contracts are in accessible formats in accordance with the accessibility requirements set out in Annex I to Directive (EU) 2019/882, in plain and intelligible language and, in so far as they are in writing, legible. At the conclusion of the package travel contract or without undue delay thereafter, the organiser or retailer shall provide the traveller with a copy or confirmation of the contract on a durable medium. The traveller shall be entitled to request a paper copy if the package travel contract has been concluded in the simultaneous physical presence of the parties.’ Amendment 45 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point b Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 7 – paragraph 2a 2a.  The relevant information form set out in Annex I shall be attached to the contract. The contract shall contain a clear reference to that information form.. 2a.  The relevant information form set out in Annex I shall be attached to the contract or made available electronically at the time of its conclusion. The contract shall contain a clear reference to that information form. Amendment 46 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 a (new) - Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 11 – paragraph 2 – introductory part (6a)  in Article 11, the introductory part of paragraph 2 is replaced by the following: 2.  If, before the start of the package, the organiser is constrained to alter significantly any of the main characteristics of the travel services as referred to in point (a) of the first subparagraph of Article 5(1) or cannot fulfil the special requirements as referred to in point (a) of Article 7(2), or proposes to increase the price of the package by more than 8 % in accordance with Article 10(2), the traveller may within a reasonable period specified by the organiser: ‘2. If, before the start of the package, the organiser is constrained to alter significantly any of the main characteristics of the travel services as referred to in point (a) of the first subparagraph of Article 5(1) or cannot fulfil the special requirements as referred to in point (a) of Article 7(2), or proposes to increase the price of the package by more than 8 % in accordance with Article 10(2), it shall inform immediately the traveller who may within a reasonable period specified by the organiser:’ Amendment 47 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point -a (new) Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 12 – paragraph 1 (-a)  paragraph 1 is replaced by the following: 1.  Member States shall ensure that the traveller may terminate the package travel contract at any time before the start of the package. Where the traveller terminates the package travel contract under this paragraph, the traveller may be required to pay an appropriate and justifiable termination fee to the organiser. The package travel contract may specify reasonable standardised termination fees based on the time of the termination of the contract before the start of the package and the expected cost savings and income from alternative deployment of the travel services. In the absence of standardised termination fees, the amount of the termination fee shall correspond to the price of the package minus the cost savings and income from alternative deployment of the travel services. At the traveller's request the organiser shall provide a justification for the amount of the termination fees. ‘1. Member States shall ensure that the traveller may terminate the package travel contract at any time before the start of the package. Where the traveller terminates the package travel contract under this paragraph, the traveller may be required to pay a standardised termination fee laid down in the contract.’ Amendment 48 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point -a a (new) Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1a (new) (-aa)  in paragraph 1, the following subparagraph is added: ‘The organiser shall clearly state either the specific amount of the standardised termination fee or the calculation method in the pre-contractual information provided to the traveller. The standardised termination fee shall be appropriate and justifiable, taking into account for example the timing of the termination before the start of the package, the expected cost savings, and the potential income from the alternative deployment of travel services.’ Amendment 49 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point a Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 12 – paragraph 2 2.  Notwithstanding paragraph 1, the traveller shall have the right to terminate the package travel contract before the start of the package without paying any termination fee in the event of unavoidable and extraordinary circumstances occurring at the travel destination or its immediate vicinity, at the place of the traveller’s residence or departure or affecting the journey to the destination, where such circumstances significantly affect the performance of the package. The traveller may terminate the contract where it can be reasonably expected that the performance of the package travel contract will be significantly affected by unavoidable and extraordinary circumstances. If the package travel contract is terminated in accordance with this paragraph, the traveller shall be entitled to a full refund of any payments made for the package but shall not be entitled to additional compensation. 2.  Notwithstanding paragraph 1, the traveller shall have the right to terminate the package travel contract before the start of the package without paying any termination fee where it can be reasonably expected that the package travel contract will be significantly and objectively affected by unavoidable and extraordinary circumstances occurring at the travel destination or its immediate vicinity, departure or affecting the traveller’s journey to or from the destination. If the package travel contract is terminated in accordance with this paragraph, the traveller shall be entitled to a full refund of any payments made for the package but shall not be entitled to additional compensation. Amendment 50 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point a a (new) Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 12 – paragraph 3 – introductory part (aa)  in paragraph 3, the introductory part is replaced by the following: 3.  The organiser may terminate the package travel contract and provide the traveller with a full refund of any payments made for the package, but shall not be liable for additional compensation, if: ‘3. The organiser may terminate the package travel contract and provide the traveller with a full refund of any payments made for the package, or, in a non-binding manner, offer substantially the same package through alternative carriers and transport modes, or an alternative travel service to replace the original package, or components of that package. However, the organiser shall not be liable for additional compensation, if:’ Amendment 51 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point b Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 12 – paragraph 3a 3a.  Official warnings against travel to a particular destination issued by the authorities of the Member State of departure or traveller’s residence or the country of destination, or the fact that travellers will be subject to serious restrictions at the travel destination or in the Member State of residence or departure after returning from the trip or holiday, shall be important elements to be taken into account in the assessment of whether a termination of the contract based on paragraph 2 and paragraph 3, point (b), is justified. 3a.  Official warnings against travel to a particular destination issued by the authorities of the Member State of departure or traveller’s residence or the country of destination, or the fact that travellers will be subject to serious restrictions at the travel destination or in the Member State of residence or departure after returning from the trip or holiday, shall be important elements to be taken into account in the assessment of whether a termination of the contract based on paragraph 2 and paragraph 3, point (b), is justified. This applies in particular where an official warning has been issued at most 28 days before the scheduled start of the package but is without prejudice to a case-by-case assessment. Where the traveller has been duly informed about an official warning and travel restrictions by the organiser, and nonetheless proceeded with a booking, the traveller shall assume the financial risk in the event that he or she terminates the package travel contract. Amendment 52 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point c Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 12 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 The organiser shall provide any refunds required under paragraphs 2 and 3 or, with respect to paragraph 1, reimburse any payments made by or on behalf of the traveller for the package minus the appropriate and justifiable termination fee. The organiser shall make such refunds or reimbursements to the traveller without undue delay and, in any event, not later than 14 days after the package travel contract is terminated, regardless of whether the traveller specifically asks for a refund. The organiser shall provide any refunds required under paragraphs 2 and 3 or, with respect to paragraph 1, reimburse any payments made by or on behalf of the traveller for the package minus the appropriate and justifiable termination fee. The organiser shall make such refunds or reimbursements to the traveller without undue delay and, in any event, not later than 14 days after the package travel contract is terminated, regardless of whether the traveller specifically asks for a refund. Where the traveller's payment details are no longer valid, the traveller shall provide the organiser with the correct payment details. The organiser shall make a refund or reimbursement no later than 14 days after the traveller has submitted the new payment details. Amendment 53 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 12a – paragraph 1 1.  Member States shall ensure that, where a contract is terminated pursuant to Articles 10, 11 or 12, the organiser may give the traveller the choice to accept a voucher which can be used for a future package instead of a refund. 1.  Member States shall ensure that, where a contract is terminated pursuant to Articles 10, 11 or 12, the organiser may give the traveller the choice to accept a voucher which can be used for a future package instead of a refund. The organiser may offer a voucher of a higher value than the traveller's refund right. Amendment 54 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 12a – paragraph 1 a (new) 1a.  The traveller’s consent shall not be assumed. Before issuing a voucher, the organiser shall always seek the express consent of the traveller. Amendment 55 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 12a – paragraph 2 – point a a (new) (aa)  the value of the voucher; Amendment 56 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 12a – paragraph 2 – point a b (new) (ab)  the fact that the voucher can be used in full or in part and that it can be used for any travel service proposed by the organiser; Amendment 57 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 12a – paragraph 2 – point a c (new) (ac)  the fact that the voucher can be transferred once and without any fee; Amendment 58 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 12a – paragraph 2 – point b (b)  the validity period of the voucher and the rights of travellers in relation to vouchers as laid down in this Article, (b)  the validity period of the voucher and the rights of travellers in relation to vouchers as laid down in this Article and the fact that these will not change during the validity period of the voucher, Amendment 59 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 12a – paragraph 2 a (new) 2a.  The information referred to in paragraph 2 shall be shared proactively, automatically, and in a personalised manner to travellers through digital communication channels by the organiser. Amendment 60 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 12a – paragraph 3 3.  The value of the voucher offered shall correspond at least to the amount of the traveller’s refund right. The organiser may offer a voucher on a higher amount. 3.  The value of the voucher offered shall correspond at least to the amount of the traveller’s refund right. The organiser may offer a voucher of a higher total value. Amendment 61 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 12a – paragraph 3 a (new) 3a.  For travellers who opt for a voucher, the organiser shall offer an alternative that, at a minimum, meets their convenience in choosing travel services. Furthermore, these travellers shall be given priority in their choice of travel services. Amendment 62 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 12a – paragraph 4 4.  Travellers shall lose their right to a refund during the validity period of the voucher only if they accept the voucher instead of a refund explicitly and in writing. The parties may at any time agree on a full refund before a voucher is redeemed or expires. 4.  Travellers shall lose their right to a refund during the validity period of the voucher after accepting the voucher on a durable medium. The parties may at any time agree on a full or partial refund before a voucher is redeemed or expires. Amendment 63 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 12a – paragraph 5 5.  Vouchers shall have a validity period of a maximum of 12 months from the day a traveller accepts a voucher in accordance with paragraph 4. That period may be extended once for up to 12 months with the explicit and written agreement of both parties. 5.  Vouchers shall have a validity period of a maximum of 12 months from the day a traveller accepts a voucher in accordance with paragraph 4. That period may be extended once for up to 12 months with the explicit and written agreement of both parties. Travellers shall have the right to request a refund after the end of the validity period. Amendment 64 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 12a – paragraph 6 6.  If the voucher is not redeemed within its validity period, the organiser shall refund the amount specified in the voucher as soon as possible and at the latest within 14 days after the end of the validity period without the need of any prior request by the traveller. 6.  It shall be possible for vouchers to be used for all travel services proposed by the organiser. Travellers may use vouchers for one or more services offered by organisers and in parts on different occasions. If the voucher is not redeemed within its validity period, the organiser shall refund the amount corresponding to the traveller’s refund rights as soon as possible and at the latest within 14 days after the end of the validity period without the need of any prior request by the traveller. If the voucher is partially redeemed, the organiser shall refund the remaining amount of the voucher as soon as possible and at the latest within 14 days after the partial redemption of the voucher, without the need of any prior request by the traveller. Amendment 65 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 12a – paragraph 7 7.  Vouchers shall be transferable to another traveller without any additional cost. 7.  Vouchers shall be transferable to another traveller only once without any additional cost. The traveller shall inform the organiser in writing of the transfer of the voucher, and shall provide the organiser with the transferee’s personal data necessary to redeem the voucher or to receive a refund at the end of its validity period. In order to improve traceability, the voucher shall be marked as transferred. Amendment 66 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 17 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 Member States shall ensure that organisers established in their territory provide security for the refund of all payments made by or on behalf of travellers in the event of organisers’ insolvency. This shall include the protection of payments made where a package is not performed in full or in part as a consequence of the organiser’s insolvency or where a traveller was entitled to a refund or had received a voucher from the organiser before its insolvency. In relation to vouchers, the security shall be limited to the amount of payments received from the traveller. If the return journey is included in the package travel contract, organisers shall also provide security for the traveller’s repatriation. Continuation of the package may be offered. Member States shall ensure that organisers established in their territory provide security for the refund of all payments made by or on behalf of travellers in the event of organisers’ insolvency. This shall include the protection of payments made where a package is not performed in full or in part as a consequence of the organiser’s insolvency or where a traveller was entitled to a refund or had received a voucher from the organiser before its insolvency. In relation to vouchers, the security shall be limited to the traveller’s refund rights. If the return journey is included in the package travel contract, organisers shall also provide security for the traveller’s repatriation. Continuation of the package may be offered. Amendment 67 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 17 – paragraph 1 a (new) 1a.  Member States shall ensure that, where an organiser becomes insolvent, travellers are informed without undue delay and through appropriate communication channels at least about the following: (a)  the fact of the organiser’s insolvency; (b)  the name and contact details of the entity providing insolvency protection; and (c)  their rights in relation to packages that have already started or that can still be performed. Amendment 68 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 17 – paragraph 2 2.  The security referred to in paragraph 1 shall be effective and shall cover reasonably foreseeable costs. It shall cover the amounts of payments made by or on behalf of travellers in respect of packages, taking into account the length of the period between the receipt of any payments and the completion of the packages, as well as the estimated cost for repatriations in the event of the organiser’s insolvency. The security shall be sufficient to cover costs for refunds and, where applicable, repatriations and vouchers, at all times. The coverage shall take into account periods where organisers hold the highest amounts of payments and any changes in the volume of sales of packages. 2.  The security referred to in paragraph 1 shall be effective and shall cover reasonably foreseeable costs. It shall cover the amounts of payments made by or on behalf of travellers in respect of packages, taking into account the length of the period between the receipt of any payments and the completion of the packages, as well as the estimated cost for repatriations in the event of the organiser’s insolvency. The security shall be sufficient to cover costs for refunds and, where applicable, repatriations and vouchers, at all times. The coverage shall take into account periods where organisers hold the highest amounts of payments. Amendment 69 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 17 – paragraph 3 3.  To ensure the effectiveness of insolvency protection, Member States shall supervise the insolvency protection arrangements of organisers established on their territory, monitor the market for the provision of insolvency protection, and may, if necessary, require a second level of protection. Any co-financing by Member States is possible only in exceptional and duly justified circumstances and shall be conditional on approval under the Union State aid provisions. 3.  To ensure the effectiveness of insolvency protection, Member States shall supervise the insolvency protection arrangements of organisers established on their territory and monitor the market for the provision of insolvency protection. Any co-financing by Member States is possible only in exceptional and duly justified circumstances and shall be conditional on approval under the Union State aid provisions. Amendment 70 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 17 – paragraph 6 6.  Refunds of payments affected by the organiser’s insolvency shall be provided without undue delay after the traveller’s request and at the latest within three months after the traveller has submitted the documents necessary to examine the request. 6.  Refunds of payments affected by the organiser’s insolvency shall be provided without undue delay after the traveller’s request and at the latest within six months after the traveller has submitted the documents necessary to examine the request. When requesting a refund, travellers shall provide the package travel contract as well as proof of payment made to the organiser or, where applicable, retailers. Such documentation shall be sufficient for the traveller to request a refund. Amendment 71 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10 Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 18 – paragraph 2 2.  Member States shall designate central contact points to facilitate the administrative cooperation and supervision of organisers operating in different Member States and to exchange information in relation to insolvency protection and any mechanisms put in place to ensure the effectiveness of refunds for terminated package travel contracts. Member States shall notify the contact details of those contact points to all other Member States and the Commission. 2.  Member States shall designate central contact points to facilitate the administrative cooperation and supervision of organisers operating in different Member States and to exchange information in relation to insolvency protection and any mechanisms put in place to ensure the effectiveness of refunds for terminated package travel contracts. Member States shall notify the contact details of those contact points to all other Member States and the Commission. Each Member State shall create an inventory listing all traders that sell packages in their territory and the respective identity of the entity in charge of the insolvency protection. Those inventories shall be public and accessible and shall facilitate the cooperation between contact points designated by the Member States. The Commission shall centralise and maintain up-to-date information related to insolvency protection, including a list of all the inventories and make it publicly available on its website. Amendment 72 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11 Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Chapter VI (11)  Article 19 is replaced by the following: (11)  Chapter VI is deleted. ‘Article 19 Insolvency protection and information requirements for linked travel arrangements 1.   For linked travel arrangements, as defined in Article 3(5), Member States shall ensure that traders which invite travellers to conclude a contract on a different type of travel service shall provide security for the refund of all payments they receive from travellers. If such traders are responsible for the traveller’s return journey, the security shall also cover the traveller’s repatriation. The second subparagraph of Article 17(1), Article 17(2) to (6) and Article 18 shall apply mutatis mutandis. 2.   When inviting the traveller to conclude a contract on a different type of travel service, the trader, including where it is not established in a Member State but, by any means, directs such activities to a Member State, shall provide the traveller with the relevant standard information form set out in Annex II, completed as appropriate. The form shall be provided in a clear and prominent manner. 3.   Where traders do not comply with the requirements set out in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Article, the rights and obligations laid down in Articles 9 and 12 and Chapter IV shall apply in relation to the travel services included in the linked travel arrangement. 4.  Where a linked travel arrangement is formed, the trader which concludes a contract on a different type of travel service shall inform the trader which invited the traveller to conclude such contract on this fact.’ Amendment 73 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – point 11 a (new) Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 21 – paragraph 1 (11a)  in Article 21, the first paragraph is replaced by the following: Member States shall ensure that a trader is liable for any errors due to technical defects in the booking system which are attributable to him and, where the trader has agreed to arrange the booking of a package or of travel services which are part of linked travel arrangements, for the errors made during the booking process. Member States shall ensure that a trader is liable for any errors due to technical defects in the booking system which are attributable to him and, where the trader has agreed to arrange the booking of a package, for the errors made during the booking process. Amendment 74 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – point 12 a (new) Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 23 – paragraph 1 (12a)  Article 23(1) is replaced by the following: 1.  A declaration by an organiser of a package or a trader facilitating a linked travel arrangement that he is acting exclusively as a travel service provider, as an intermediary or in any other capacity, or that a package or a linked travel arrangement does not constitute a package or a linked travel arrangement, shall not absolve that organiser or trader from the obligations imposed on them under this Directive. 1.  A declaration by an organiser of a package that he is acting exclusively as a travel service provider, as an intermediary or in any other capacity, or that a package does not constitute a package, shall not absolve that organiser from the obligations imposed on it under this Directive. Amendment 75 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – pont 12 b (new) Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 24 – paragraph 1 a (new) (12b)  in Article 24, the following paragraphs are added: 1a.  Without prejudice to Articles 7(2), 13, 15 and 16, each organiser and retailer shall set up a complaint-handling mechanism for the rights and obligations covered by this Directive. They shall make their contact details and working language, or languages, known to travellers and available to consumers at the same time of the documents to be supplied before the start of the package in accordance with Article 7(1), point (g). Amendment 76 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – point 12 b (new) Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 24 – paragraph 1 b (new) 1b.  When a traveller submits a complaint using the mechanism referred to in paragraph 1a, the organiser or retailer shall confirm the receipt with a copy of the exchanges, within seven working days of submission of the complaint. The organiser or the retailer shall give a reasoned reply to the traveller within 30 working days. Organisers and retailers shall keep the data necessary to assess the complaint for the duration of the entire complaint-handling procedure and shall make that data available to national enforcement bodies upon request. Amendment 77 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – point 12 b (new) Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 24 – paragraph 1 c (new) 1c.  Details of the complaint-handling procedure shall be made available on the website of the organisers and retailers offering services covered by this Directive. Amendment 78 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – point 12 b (new) Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 24 – paragraph 1 d (new) 1d.  The submission of complaints by travellers using the mechanism referred to in paragraph 1a shall be without prejudice to their rights to submit disputes for out-of-court resolution in accordance with Article 26a, or to seek redress through court proceedings, subject to periods of limitation in accordance with national law. Amendment 79 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12 c (new) Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 25 (12c)  Article 25 is replaced by the following: Article 25 ‘Article 25 Penalties Penalties Member States shall lay down the rules on penalties applicable to infringements of national provisions adopted pursuant to this Directive and shall take all measures necessary to ensure that they are implemented. The penalties provided for shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive. Member States shall lay down the rules on penalties applicable to infringements of national provisions adopted pursuant to this Directive and shall take all measures necessary to ensure that they are implemented. The penalties provided for shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive. The maximum amount of the fines shall be at least 4% of the trader’s annual turnover in the Member State or Member States concerned. Member States shall notify the Commission of those rules and measures and shall notify it without delay of any subsequent amendment affecting them.’ Amendment 80 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12 d (new) Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Article 26 a (new) (12d)  the following Article is inserted: ‘Article 26a Alternative dispute resolution mechanism Organisers, retailers, intermediaries and other actors falling within the scope of this Directive may participate in alternative dispute resolution procedures.’ Amendment 81 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 14 Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Annex II (14)  Annex II is replaced by the text in Annex II to this Directive. (14)  Annex II is deleted. Amendment 82 Proposal for a directive Article 3 Article 3 Article 3 Transposition Transposition 1.  Member States shall adopt and publish, by [18 months after the entry into force of the Directive] at the latest, the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive. They shall forthwith communicate to the Commission the text of those provisions. Member States shall adopt and publish, by [24 months after the entry into force of the Directive] at the latest, the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive. They shall apply those provisions from [6 months after the transposition deadline]. They shall forthwith communicate to the Commission the text of those provisions. They shall apply those provisions from [6 months after the transposition deadline]. When Member States adopt those provisions, they shall contain a reference to this Directive or be accompanied by such a reference on the occasion of their official publication. Member States shall determine how such reference is to be made. When Member States adopt those provisions, they shall contain a reference to this Directive or be accompanied by such a reference on the occasion of their official publication. Member States shall determine how such reference is to be made. 2.  Member States shall communicate to the Commission the text of the main provisions of national law which they adopt in the field covered by this Directive. Member States shall communicate to the Commission the text of the main provisions of national law which they adopt in the field covered by this Directive. Amendment 83 Proposal for a directive Annex II Directive (EU) 2015/2302 Annex II […] deleted

(1) The matter was referred back for interinstitutional negotiations to the committee responsible, pursuant to Rule 60(4), fourth subparagraph (A10-0140/2025).

European Parliament resolution of 11 September 2025 on a new vision for the European Universities alliances (2025/2036(INI))

P10_TA(2025)0196 A10-0135/2025

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in particular Articles 13 and 14 thereof on the freedom of the arts and sciences and the right to education,

–  having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/817 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2021 establishing Erasmus+: the Union Programme for education and training, youth and sport and repealing Regulation (EU) No 1288/2013(1),

–  having regard to the study of 11 September 2023 conducted for its Committee on Culture and Education entitled ‘EU funding programmes 2021-2027 in culture, media, education, youth and sports: first lessons, challenges and future perspectives – Erasmus+’,

–  having regard to the study of 20 July 2023 conducted for its Committee on Culture and Education entitled ‘Early implementation of four 2021-2027 EU programmes: Erasmus+, Creative Europe, European Solidarity Corps and Citizens, Equality, Rights and Values (Strand 3)’,

–  having regard to the Council conclusions of 17 May 2021 on the European Universities initiative – Bridging higher education, research, innovation and society: Paving the way for a new dimension in European higher education,

–  having regard to the Council conclusions of 14 and 15 December 2017,

–  having regard to the Council conclusions of 7 June 2018 on moving towards a vision of a European Education Area,

–  having regard to the Council Resolution of 18 November 2019 on further developing the European Education Area to support future-oriented education and training systems(2),

–  having regard to the Council Resolution of 29 November 2021 on a new European agenda for adult learning 2021-2030(3),

–  having regard to the Council Recommendation of 13 May 2024 entitled ‘“Europe on the Move” – learning mobility opportunities for everyone’(4),

–  having regard to the Commission proposal of 28 February 2025 for a Council Recommendation on the European Research Area Policy Agenda 2025-2027 (COM(2025)0062),

–  having regard to Council Recommendation (EU) 2021/2122 of 26 November 2021 on a Pact for Research and Innovation in Europe(5),

–  having regard to the Commission communication of 18 January 2022 on a European strategy for universities (COM(2022)0016),

–  having regard to the Commission report of 15 April 2024 on good practices from European University Alliances Projects (Pilot II),

–  having regard to the Commission report on the outcomes and transformational potential of the European Universities initiative(6),

–  having regard to the Commission communication of 27 March 2024 entitled ‘A blueprint for a European degree’ (COM(2024)0144),

–  having regard to the Commission staff working document of 27 March 2024 (SWD(2024)0074), accompanying Commission communication COM(2024)0144, the Commission proposal of 27 March 2024 for a Council recommendation on a European Quality Assurance and Recognition System in Higher Education (COM(2024)0147) and the Commission proposal of 27 March 2024 for a Council recommendation on attractive and sustainable careers in higher education (COM(2024)0145),

–  having regard to the Commission staff working document of 19 December 2024 entitled ‘Report on the final outcomes of the Erasmus+ policy experimentation projects: European degree (label) and institutionalised EU cooperation instruments’ (SWD(2024)0291),

–  having regard to the Commission communication of 5 March 2025 entitled ‘The Union of Skills’ (COM(2025)0090),

–  having regard to the Commission communication of 5 March 2025 on a STEM Education Strategic Plan: skills for competitiveness and innovation (COM(2025)0089),

–  having regard to the mid-term review of the European Education Area of 2023,

–  having regard to the Rome Ministerial Communiqué adopted on 19 November 2020 at the Ministerial conference of the European Higher Education Area,

–  having regard to the Principles, Guidelines and Indicators of the Social Dimension of Higher Education of 9 January 2024, published by the Bologna Follow-up Group, Working Group on Social Dimension 2021-2024,

–  having regard to the independent high-level report on the future of the single market by Enrico Letta, entitled ‘Much more than a market – Speed, Security, Solidarity: Empowering the Single Market to deliver a sustainable future and prosperity for all EU Citizens’, published in April 2024,

–  having regard to the report by Mario Draghi on the Future of European Competitiveness, published in September 2024,

–  having regard to the report on research and innovation by a group of independent experts chaired by Manuel Heitor, entitled ‘Align, act, accelerate – Research, technology and innovation to boost European competitiveness’, published in October 2024,

–  having regard to its resolution of 23 June 2022 on the implementation of inclusion measures within Erasmus+ 2014-2020(7),

–  having regard to its resolution of 15 September 2020 on effective measures to ‘green’ Erasmus+, Creative Europe and the European Solidarity Corps(8),

–  having regard to its resolution of 19 May 2022 on establishing the European Education Area by 2025 – micro-credentials, individual learning accounts and learning for a sustainable environment(9),

–  having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Culture and Education (A10-0135/2025),

A.  whereas quality education and training as well as academic cooperation are prerequisites for achieving the European Union’s strategic autonomy, promoting EU’s values(10), fighting skills shortages by attracting and retaining talent, and fostering competitiveness with leading global universities based on the development of human capital, resilience and wellbeing;

B.  whereas the importance of academia and universities for a competitive, resilient and autonomous European Union is underlined in Mario Draghi’s report on the future of European competitiveness, in Enrico Letta’s report on the future of the single market and in Manuel Heitor’s report on the interim evaluation of Horizon Europe;

C.  whereas the fragmentation of the EU’s higher education and research undermines the capacity of the EU to safeguard its sovereignty, promote its values and assert global influence; whereas greater integration could reinforce the EU’s strategic position;

D.  whereas the Competitiveness Compass emphasises the importance of high-quality education, training and lifelong learning to fill in the skills and labour gaps;

E.  whereas Erasmus+ is an EU flagship programme supporting education, training, youth and sport in Europe and internationally, while fostering mobility and academic cooperation; whereas stronger interaction between Erasmus+ and other existing EU programmes such as Horizon Europe would benefit those objectives while fostering a more comprehensive approach to higher education;

F.  whereas the European Universities alliances serve a multidimensional purpose, starting with the creation of joint curricula, progressing towards the creation of inter-university campuses with a strong European dimension that fosters the mobility of students, lifelong learners and researchers, as well as academic and non-academic staff, and catalysing other even more transformative changes in the higher education landscapes in Member States and participating countries for a truly competitive European Education Area;

G.  whereas academic freedom is a central principle of universities’ missions and activities as enshrined in Article 13 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU and the UNESCO Recommendation of 11 November 1997 concerning the Status of Higher Education Teaching Personnel; whereas such freedom is crucial to the well-being of democratic societies and thus needs to be further protected and promoted;

H.  whereas the European Universities alliances, by providing seamless mobility for students, researchers and academic and non-academic staff within the EU and beyond, play a role in enhancing research, innovation and education in the single market, and so are central to the realisation of the ‘fifth freedom’ as described in the Letta report;

I.  whereas higher education institutions in Europe face challenges with transnational collaboration, especially with regard to funding, significant divergences in national and regional legislation, legal status and governance structures, and contractual barriers to knowledge sharing;

J.  whereas the European Universities initiative has been successful, exceeding expectations in terms of participation and engagement; whereas the aim of creating 20 alliances set out in the 2017 Council conclusions has been surpassed, as 65 alliances have now been created, encompassing more than 570 universities with more than 2 200 external partners, without any additional budget allocations and without any guarantee of continuity for funded projects;

K.  whereas these current alliances were selected through five competitive open calls focusing on quality, excellence, academic merit, inclusivity and equitable geographical coverage;

L.  whereas the European Universities initiative is a key instrument for building an integrated, competitive and inclusive European Education Area, capable of responding to global challenges as well as strengthening European identity, culture and values;

M.  whereas the alliances have proven their transformative potential to modernise the Member States’ higher education systems, playing a leading role in educating a new generation of mobile European students, and have contributed to cutting-edge research; whereas universities from several alliances are key advocates and drivers of legislative changes in their own countries;

N.  whereas 23 Member States are currently co-funding alliances with their national budgets;

State of play, challenges and obstacles

1.  Acknowledges the warm welcome and commitment given to the European Universities initiative by higher education institutions and the initiative’s role in facilitating efforts to remove obstacles to regional, cross-border and international cooperation in higher education, such as fragmented funding, disparities in accreditation systems and legal barriers;

2.  Highlights the fact that mobility projects, the creation of common curricula and cooperation between universities in Europe are instrumental in addressing needs in strategic areas and reinforcing the sense of belonging to Europe and adherence to the EU’s values, while preserving the diversity and richness of the European Union;

3.  Notes that the alliances are a powerful tool for the implementation and advancement of the Bologna Process; highlights the leverage effect alliances have on transformation processes in the higher education landscape through pioneering and boosting innovative approaches as well as new methods for cooperation, the creation of opportunities and accessibility for students;

4.  Underlines the diversity of the alliances in terms of governance, topics and subjects covered, and the size and location of participating universities; notes the successful participation of many universities from medium-sized cities, rural areas and outermost regions, making it an accessible and inclusive initiative; highlights the fact that a ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach is not appropriate for the alliances; notes that the Europe-wide geographical representation of universities within the alliances is key to tackling brain drain and attracting international talent, while making an invaluable contribution to European unity and integration;

5.  Welcomes the integration of students in the alliances’ governance structures, enabling young people to have a substantial and real impact on their development, as youth participation in democratic decision-making processes helps to make alliances more forward-looking and addresses practical challenges faced by students; stresses the importance of aligning student engagement with student organisations to ensure transparency, fairness and inclusivity in stakeholder involvement;

6.  Highlights the fact that alliances have the potential and expertise to help universities address socio-economic challenges; underlines the importance of incorporating societal impact as a cross-cutting element in the activities of the alliances; calls for clear strategies to ensure and monitor accessibility and the inclusion of people with fewer opportunities(11) in all alliances’ activities, especially through the dismantling of barriers to mobility and the prevention of all forms of discrimination, in line with the Erasmus Charter for Higher Education;

7.  Welcomes pilot projects aimed at creating a European degree and/or a legal status; underlines, however, that alliances should not serve as the sole instrument for innovation in higher education; notes that alliances should have the freedom to specialise and be flexible in their undertakings;

8.  Welcomes the outcomes of the six Erasmus+ policy experimentation projects on the European degree and the European degree label conducted by 21 alliances(12); acknowledges the clear added value of a common framework for European degrees, based on European criteria, as a step towards the recognition of degrees and diplomas at EU level; recognises that such EU-level recognition would enhance mobility and the quality of education, reinforcing the framework for cooperation and encouraging wider engagement in transnational academic programmes as well as strengthening the global visibility and competitiveness of European higher education;

9.  Notes that the European degree label should be accessible to all other joint university programmes and be complementary to national qualification frameworks, which should be adapted when necessary without creating an additional administrative burden;

10.  Firmly believes in the potential of the alliances to strengthen the European Higher Education Area, paving the way for a single area of accreditation at EU level; believes that this is a necessary step for our European autonomy, as numerous European higher education institutions, such as those issuing MBA degrees, still rely on American accreditation agencies;

11.  Welcomes the significant increase in the number of mobility projects involving students, lifelong learners and researchers, as well as academic and non-academic staff in universities participating in alliances compared to other Erasmus+ mobility projects;

12.  Notes, however, that the initial objective of achieving seamless mobility for 50 % of students in participating alliances has not yet been reached and will remain challenging without appropriate funding mechanisms; is worried, in this regard, about the potential competition between the alliances’ mobility schemes and universities’ general Erasmus+ mobility, which share the same limited funding provisions, as mobility targets for alliances are higher than those for general Erasmus+ mobility; calls on the Commission, therefore, to assess those requirements;

13.  Is deeply concerned about current threats to academic freedom in several parts of the world, including in some Member States and non-EU countries participating in Erasmus+;

14.  Stresses the need for alliances to uphold EU values, democratic resilience and institutional autonomy, and to foster active citizenship; highlights their role as multilateral and multicultural learning spaces;

15.  Welcomes values-based initiatives such as the cooperation in solidarity with Ukraine, the global outreach of alliances and the alliances’ role in the accession preparations of candidate countries from the Eastern neighbourhood and the Western Balkans;

16.  Welcomes the Union of Skills initiative, especially the upcoming proposal for a future investment pathway and a clear legal status for alliances, as it will make it easier for universities to initiate and lead European projects, pool resources, enhance their autonomy, reduce administrative burdens, attract funding and broaden their governance structure, especially in the case of universities from non-EU countries, as well as facilitating the institutionalisation of cross-border cooperation;

17.  Underlines the key role that universities, including alliances, play in protecting and promoting evidence-based science, building trust in democratic discourse, fostering cooperation based on EU values and making themselves and the European higher education sector more attractive to non-EU students, academic staff and researchers;

18.  Welcomes the creation of FOREU4ALL, a community of practice for European Universities alliances; underlines its key role in disseminating innovations from the alliances to the broader academic community, as universities and higher education institutions that are not part of alliances should not be left behind; recalls that policies and initiatives should benefit the entire higher education system;

19.  Acknowledges the important role of other networks within the higher education sector that bring together a broader spectrum of European universities, irrespective of their participation in an alliance; underlines the complementary nature of these networks with the alliances and their potential to prepare the ground for legislative change at national level;

20.  Underlines that the mission of universities includes all four aspects of the knowledge square: education, research, innovation and service to society; stresses that alliances must be closely aligned with the labour market to address Europe’s skills shortages and competitiveness challenges;

21.  Is notably worried about the lack of research and innovation pillars within the alliances given the current framework, as it undermines the full potential for cooperation between universities within alliances;

Recommendations

22.  Encourages the alliances to deepen the link between education and research; highlights the significant ability of the alliances to build cross-border networks of excellence for researchers and to share and disseminate knowledge at EU level and beyond, especially in the STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) subjects, including in strategic fields for the EU;

23.  Underlines that the strategic vision for university alliances has to be reflected in the next multiannual financial framework to maximise their potential and impact; asks the Commission to evaluate each alliance in order to provide support and tailor-made solutions regarding their future development;

24.  Encourages the Commission, the Member States and the alliances to shift from a ‘project-based logic’ to long-term, transformative cooperation by introducing a funding approach that enables this transition; underlines the importance for alliances to be able to scale up; underlines the need to set qualitative rather than quantitative goals, emphasising the transformative impact for the European Education Area;

25.  Stresses the need for coordinated, sustainable and predictable funding for current alliances; asks the Commission to consider reserving future calls for the continuation of successful alliances, enabling them to deepen integration and build on their accomplishments; asks the Commission to keep the application and reporting processes as simple as possible; encourages a fast-track renewal process for successful alliances to secure continued funding without an excessive administrative burden;

26.  Recognises the relevance of the European Universities initiative continuing to be a part of the Erasmus+ programme, taking into account the current framework; at the same time, invites the Commission to study the viability of creating a tailor-made solution for financing the European Universities alliances in the post-2027 multiannual financial framework, with the possibility of creating a separate programme with a view to enabling alliances to plan strategically, engage in long-term initiatives and establish enduring cooperation;

27.  Calls on Member States to commit to co-financing alliances through national budgets and asks the Commission to present a comprehensive investment strategy for the alliances that enables them to fulfil their quadruple mission; notes that this strategy should incorporate synergies with EU programmes such as Horizon Europe, the European Competitiveness Fund, the European Social Fund Plus and the European Regional Development Fund, in order to optimise resources, avoid duplication, strengthen interaction and collaboration and retain their competitive nature;

28.  Highlights the fact that, in order to achieve real and sustainable success encompassing quality, excellence and inclusion, support for alliances cannot come solely from the EU budget but should also come from coordinated contributions from national, regional, local and private sources, provided that they can guarantee the autonomy of higher education institutions and safeguard academic freedom;

29.  Emphasises that the closer integration of alliances with the private sector can be mutually beneficial; encourages partnerships and structured cooperation between universities and businesses in order to create integrated systems that foster innovation and high-level technical and professional training, and facilitate students’ transition to the job market as well as reskilling and upskilling for people outside of higher education;

30.  Stresses the need to strengthen the internationalisation of alliances, in line with, among others, the Global Gateway strategy and talent partnerships; notes that alliances are at the right level for establishing partnerships with non-EU countries, in particular candidate countries, and can strengthen the international dimension of Erasmus+, through, for example, Erasmus Mundus; asks the Commission and the alliances to ensure that all partners involved comply with EU values and the principle of academic freedom, and adhere to the Erasmus Charter for Higher Education;

31.  Notes that alliances are testing innovative ways of teaching and acquiring knowledge, such as European learning pathways, micro-credentials, blended learning mobility and the automatic recognition of qualifications; stresses the need to invest in secure digital infrastructure and strengthen existing initiatives such as the European student card;

32.  Emphasises the need to consolidate the interoperability of computer systems and align European and national policies to create genuine virtual European inter-campuses; encourages more cross-alliance collaboration to enable secure, interoperable student identification, course registration, and academic record exchange as well as investment in integrating new educational technologies;

33.  Stresses the need to expand the use of micro-credentials, building on best practice, to integrate the alliances in a wider learning environment, bridging their work with other non-formal learning institutions; notes that training and upskilling recognised through micro-credentials can facilitate the flexible revision, expansion and modernisation of university degrees;

34.  Asks the Commission to consider adding criteria to possible future calls, in line with topics linked to European strategic autonomy and competitiveness, such as resilience, energy, climate change, the digital transition and digital skills, and defence, while keeping in mind the core objectives of adherence to EU values, education excellence and innovation;

35.  Stresses the need for alliances to have the appropriate structures and capacities to support transfer from academia to business, to contribute to the realisation of the EU’s ambitions of strategic autonomy; calls on the Commission to dismantle barriers that impede the effective sharing and pooling of joint resources and knowledge, through actions such as the facilitation of joint recruitment of academic staff and researchers, as well as the development and use of shared facilities;

36.  Underlines the need for effective and accessible awareness raising and information campaigns about the European Universities alliances to foster greater engagement, especially at local levels and among students, as recognition of the initiative is currently very low;

37.  Calls on the Hungarian Government to comply with the rule of law and EU values and to put in place the necessary reforms so that Hungarian students, teachers and researchers of public trust funded universities may benefit from the Erasmus+ programme, including alliances under the European Universities initiative;

o
o   o

38.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission.

(1) OJ L 189, 28.5.2021, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/817/oj. (2) OJ C 389, 18.11.2019, p. 1. (3) OJ C 504, 14.12.2021, p. 9. (4) OJ C, C/2024/3364, 14.6.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/3364/oj. (5) OJ L 431, 2.12.2021, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reco/2021/2122/oj. (6) European Commission: Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture et al., Report on the outcomes and transformational potential of the European Universities initiative, Publications Office of the European Union, 2025, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2766/32313. (7) OJ C 32, 27.1.2023, p. 58. (8) OJ C 385, 22.9.2021, p. 2. (9) OJ C 479, 16.12.2022, p. 65. (10) As enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty of European Union and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. (11) As defined in Regulation (EU) 2021/817 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2021. (12) Commission Staff Working Document SWD(2024)0291.

European Parliament resolution of 11 September 2025 on the implementation and streamlining of EU internal market rules to strengthen the single market (2025/2009(INI))

P10_TA(2025)0197 A10-0151/2025

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission communication of 11 February 2025 entitled ‘Commission work programme 2025 – Moving forward together: A Bolder, Simpler, Faster Union’ (COM(2025)0045),

–  having regard to the Political Guidelines for the 2024-2029 Commission term, presented by the President-elect of the Commission on 18 July 2024,

–  having regard to the Commission communication of 11 February 2025 entitled ‘A simpler and faster Europe: Communication on implementation and simplification’ (COM(2025)0047),

–  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 29 January 2025 entitled ‘The 2025 Annual Single Market and Competitiveness Report’ (COM(2025)0026),

–  having regard to the report by Mario Draghi of 9 September 2024 entitled ‘The future of European competitiveness’,

–  having regard to the report by Enrico Letta of 10 April 2024 entitled ‘Much more than a market’,

–  having regard to the report by Sauli Niinistö of 30 October 2024 entitled ‘Safer Together – Strengthening Europe’s Civilian and Military Preparedness and Readiness’,

–  having regard to its resolution of 18 January 2023 on the 30th anniversary of the single market: celebrating achievements and looking towards future developments(1),

–  having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection (A10-0151/2025),

A.  whereas the EU is one of the largest economic blocs in the world, with a population of around 450 million people; whereas ensuring a competitive, fit-for-purpose and simplified regulatory environment is essential for strengthening the EU’s global position, fostering long-term growth, consumer confidence and protection, and innovation, and completing the twin transition;

B.  whereas the Commission has set targets to reduce administrative costs by 25 % for all companies and 35 % for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) by 2029; whereas the Commission communication entitled ‘A simpler and faster Europe’ underlines the need to deliver fast and visible improvements through smarter regulation, more effective implementation and better stakeholder engagement; whereas such efforts should be designed to benefit businesses, consumers and society at large by enhancing market access, reducing unnecessary burdens and ensuring a fair level playing field, while also upholding the EU’s core policy objectives and high social and environmental standards;

C.  whereas the Draghi and Letta reports have identified internal market fragmentation, regulatory complexities and the inconsistent implementation of EU rules as major obstacles to the competitiveness of the EU single market; whereas according to the Draghi report, fostering a more stable and predictable regulatory environment, with a focus on necessary and proportionate legislative action, could help reinforce the EU’s competitiveness;

D.  whereas the Niinistö report’s observations on simplifying and strengthening the EU’s defence industry highlight the strategic need to streamline regulations in key sectors to reduce fragmentation, accelerate public procurement and improve delivery to support the defence industries and enable Member States to meet essential defence spending targets and foster EU security and competitiveness;

E.  whereas the 2025 Annual Single Market and Competitiveness Report and the Single Market and Competitiveness Scoreboard provide critical information on the current state of the single market, business sentiment and sectoral competitiveness; whereas the services sector remains less integrated than the goods sector; whereas the lack of harmonisation continues to hinder the provision of cross-border services, especially by SMEs; whereas recent statistics indicate that permitting times for opening and operating a business in the EU remain significantly longer than in competing regions, creating barriers to investment and innovation(2);

F.  whereas regulatory fragmentation, complexity, overlaps and inconsistent implementation of EU internal market rules create unjustified barriers and unnecessary administrative burdens that disproportionally impact SMEs, small mid-caps and start-ups, representing 99 % of EU businesses, limiting their capacity to innovate, invest, scale-up, compete effectively and engage in cross-border activities within the single market and on global markets; whereas the SME test and better implementation and simplification, where necessary and justified, of EU rules are essential to ensure proportionality in the legal framework; whereas, as highlighted in the Draghi report, the EU’s competitiveness gap is also driven by the underperformance of large firms and whereas successful companies in the internal market, that also capture value from global markets, are vital for creating prosperity for the EU and its citizens;

G.  whereas robust enforcement of single market rules, including through swifter and effective infringement proceedings, should be considered essential to ensure fair competition and business confidence, and to protect consumers from the consequences of market fragmentation and reduced choice; whereas efforts to improve, streamline and simplify the EU’s legislative framework should also focus on enhancing quality, clarity and coherence, on reducing fragmentation in the implementation of EU rules, as well as ensuring that the legislation is easily understandable for authorities and all stakeholders;

H.  whereas the Competitiveness Compass and the Commission’s work programme 2025 set out ambitious policy objectives aimed at reinforcing the resilience of the single market, reducing administrative burdens, and aligning the regulatory framework with global best practices; whereas it is important to further link the EU’s industrial strategy to the single market strategy to strengthen the competitiveness of the EU economy, including by supporting the development and uptake of clean and strategic technologies;

I.  whereas in efforts to simplify the regulatory environment in the EU’s internal market, the views of businesses, trade unions, consumers, civil society actors, academia and other concerned stakeholders should be taken into account to ensure that EU policies support economic growth and quality jobs and create a positive environment for private investment and innovation and for reaching policy goals such as sustainability, digitalisation and consumer protection by means of comprehensive, transparent and inclusive public consultations, with particular consideration given to the specific needs and perspectives of SMEs and start-ups, as well as other stakeholders with limited capacity, ensuring that simplification efforts do not penalise early movers or remove incentives for innovation-led businesses;

J.  whereas unjustified national barriers to the free movement of goods and services, undermine the functioning of the single market and should therefore be addressed and prevented; whereas the International Monetary Fund has estimated that internal market barriers in the EU are equivalent to a 45 % tariff on manufacturing and a 110 % tariff on services; whereas such fragmentation weakens competition, hinders productivity and growth, and disproportionately affects SMEs;

K.  whereas the impact of territorial supply constraints (TSCs) on the single market, SMEs and EU citizens’ consumer purchasing power is significant as, according to the Commission, TSCs cost EU consumers more than EUR 14 billion a year;

Strengthening the single market to boost the EU’s competitiveness and global influence

1.  Underlines that the EU is falling behind in terms of global competitiveness, particularly in certain sectors; recognises that shortcomings in implementation, regulatory fragmentation and unnecessary administrative burdens are some of the main factors in the EU lagging behind in investment, innovation, job creation and business opportunities; emphasises that the promotion, streamlining and simplification of rules and the proper and timely implementation, as well as the effective enforcement, of common rules strengthen the single market, thereby boosting competitiveness, economic prosperity, employment, skills development, high quality jobs, high environmental standards and innovation;

2.  Recognises that in order to secure the EU’s prosperity, it is necessary to improve regulatory coherence and reduce unnecessary administrative burdens on businesses – specifically smaller businesses and start-ups; insists, therefore, that barriers that currently hinder growth, job creation and investment must be removed and that resources should be directed towards encouraging innovation and fostering growth while ensuring a level playing field based on high social and environmental standards; underlines the need to mobilise private investment and stresses that particular attention should be paid to reducing compliance costs for SMEs through digital tools and targeted derogations; stresses that tailored provisions for SMEs must go hand in hand with reforms addressing the persistent barriers faced by companies in the scale-up phase, while also enabling larger companies to operate and compete across borders and internationally;

3.  Emphasises that increased harmonisation, streamlined processes and the correct implementation, effective application, compliance, monitoring and enforcement of EU laws are vital for the proper functioning of the single market and the achievement of crucial EU policy goals; welcomes the Commission’s objectives to boost competitiveness, innovation and productivity through the simplification, streamlining and improved implementation and enforcement of EU rules; calls on the Commission to act upon the recommendations contained in the Draghi, Letta and Niinistö reports with concrete measures and clear timelines;

Streamlined rules, better implementation and robust enforcement for a predictable and competitive business environment

4.  Underlines that regulatory streamlining and simplification are aimed at facilitating compliance processes, while upholding the EU’s core policy objectives, ensuring that social and environmental standards, as well as digital rights and consumer protection, are not compromised, and ensuring a stable and predictable regulatory environment for businesses that provides legal clarity and certainty for all; underlines that competitiveness and innovation, especially in the context of the current cost-of-living crisis, must deliver outcomes that benefit consumers; stresses that simplification should also reinforce the EU’s long-term objectives, including the digitalisation of the economy, the green transition and consumer protection, while ensuring technology neutrality;

5.  Considers that a well-functioning single market, in which rules are implemented and enforced in a correct, coherent and effective way, is a shared responsibility of the EU institutions and the Member States; stresses that gold-plating of EU directives and fragmented enforcement of EU rules remain an obstacle for the single market, disproportionately burdening SMEs and start-ups; demands that the Commission ensure that EU rules are properly enforced across all of the Member States in a harmonised manner in order to address cross-border barriers; urges the Member States, therefore, to address gold-plating and to ensure that national implementing measures are published transparently and in a timely manner and to avoid inconsistent implementation of EU laws, while recognising the right for Member States to maintain or introduce national measures under the conditions provided for in the Treaties; calls for strengthened cooperation among existing authorities from different Member States and between national and EU regulatory authorities; encourages the Commission to support Member States in achieving more harmonised implementation of EU law by further facilitating structured exchanges and mutual learning, including through the organisation of transposition workshops and the development and use of comparative tools and practices;

6.  Asks the Commission to ensure that current and future legislation remains proportionate and does not add unnecessary burdens for businesses, while making sure it achieves its objectives, and to include in its relevant legislative initiatives an early review clause, without increasing administrative burdens in the process; believes that review clauses, beyond the overall effectiveness of legislation, should serve to specifically assess the impact of legislation on EU competitiveness and should be used to evaluate the need for revision of those relevant legislative acts that unnecessarily hamper competitiveness; recommends that such reviews also assess the digital readiness of legislation and its adaptability to innovation; urges the Commission to establish and apply a clear methodology and a simple baseline for burden reduction and for measuring and monitoring progress towards the established targets, enabling effective actions and accountability; recognises that achieving meaningful reductions in administrative burdens is a shared responsibility between the EU institutions and the Member States, and must be pursued while fully upholding the EU’s core policy objectives; calls on the co-legislators to ensure that EU legislation is targeted, proportionate and fit for purpose and that the better regulation principles are respected in all stages of the policy cycle;

7.  Urges the Commission to prepare high-quality impact assessments, which are an integral part of EU lawmaking and are important to ensure sound legal acts, of all legislative proposals, including delegated and implementing acts; underlines that the impact assessments should account for the cumulative effects of regulations and assess the interoperability between new and current rules, particularly concerning reporting requirements; insists that all impact assessments include a competitiveness check, specifically assessing the impact on SMEs, start-ups and midcaps, as well as on high-growth emerging technologies; emphasises that the competitiveness check should be systematically applied to all relevant legislative proposals, also considering their cross-sectoral impact and the impact of national spillover effects, and its findings should be taken into account, as also outlined in the EU Competitiveness Compass; considers that the Regulatory Scrutiny Board has an important role in providing quality assurance of Commission impact assessments, fitness checks and major evaluations, and stresses that it must act in a transparent manner and must have the means and the independence to carry out impartial, rigorous and high-quality scrutiny of all Commission impact assessments and legislative proposals and to raise concerns in the case of missing impact assessments; recommends strengthening the Board’s mandate and reinforcing its capacity, through adequate resourcing, to enable it to fully and effectively perform its tasks;

8.  Calls for impact assessments to be carried out on substantial amendments proposed by the Parliament and the Council to the Commission’s proposals, as already agreed by the co-legislators in 2016(3), when appropriate and necessary for the legislative process, also considering the timeline of the lawmaking process; calls for effective enforcement of the provisions of the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making and suggests further developing and using a methodology for impact assessments and competitiveness checks for the Commission, the European Parliament, the Council and the Member States; underscores that an adequate impact assessment should include potential short- and long-term costs and benefits, assessing the economic, environmental and social impacts in an integrated and balanced way and using both qualitative and quantitative analyses;

9.  Considers that it is vital to avoid overlaps and to address unclear definitions and inconsistencies between various legal acts, especially concerning single market legislation covering goods, services and digital technologies, while bearing in mind their respective specificities, in order to enhance legal clarity and efficiency; urges the Commission to prioritise evaluations in these areas, with the aim of ensuring a predictable and coherent legal framework that enables businesses to engage in long-term planning and investment; stresses that the effective implementation, enforcement and uniform application of the current legal framework must be prioritised before new legislation is proposed;

10.  Urges the Commission to ensure a more structured, transparent and inclusive stakeholder consultation process, including a review of the expert groups system; calls for measures to strengthen SME and start-up representation and for consultations to be adapted to the needs of SMEs and other stakeholders with limited capacities by allowing sufficient response time and improving accessibility to ensure inclusive and well-informed decision-making processes and to improve the quality of single market rules; emphasises that strengthening stakeholder engagement, including adequate geographical representation, is essential for deepening the single market, ensuring its effective functioning and reflecting its diversity; further underscores the crucial role of civil society in the decision-making process, which ensures a plurality of views and a fair and balanced representation; supports the establishment of regular implementation dialogues, including with social partners;

11.  Calls on the Commission to develop a mechanism to set clear deadlines for the publication of guidelines and enforcement measures before a regulation takes effect in order to avoid regulatory uncertainty and implementation delays; insists that such guidelines also be prepared in an inclusive and balanced manner and serve as a tool to facilitate compliance rather than becoming an additional burden; stresses, furthermore, that they should be concise and clear, particularly for SMEs; demands that the use of level 2 legislation, such as delegated and implementing acts, be limited to technical matters, provide clear timelines and sufficient notice periods for economic operators and be in line with the mandate set by the co-legislators;

12.  Highlights the importance of start-ups and scale-ups in driving innovation and securing the EU’s future leadership in critical industries; urges the Commission and the co-legislators to ensure that future regulations are designed to support innovation and to always uphold high standards; suggests the inclusion of regulatory sandboxes in future regulations affecting innovative sectors, where relevant, with a particular focus on benefiting SMEs and start-ups; advocates the establishment of ‘EU innovation hubs’ across the Member States;

13.  Welcomes the appointment of a Commissioner for Implementation and Simplification; calls for the Commissioner to have adequate resources and authority to ensure, in collaboration with the College of Commissioners, the proper implementation and enforcement of EU legislation and sector-specific simplification; urges all the Commissioners to systematically assess the streamlining and implementation needs within their respective policy areas and to work in close cooperation and coordination to ensure coherence and achieve tangible results on simplification and streamlining; calls on the Commission to continue putting forward proposals to simplify and streamline single market legislation, where necessary and justified by impact assessments; underlines that new simplification proposals should improve regulatory coherence, preserve legal predictability for companies and should not undermine agreed policy objectives;

14.  Notes that while the Commission has improved the detection and rectification of EU law infringements, enforcing EU rules and rectifying infringements in the single market still takes too much time; calls on the Commission to uphold its role as a guardian of the Treaties by fully utilising its enforcement powers, including the initiation of infringement procedures, when necessary, to ensure the timely, consistent and effective enforcement of the single market rules, as well as by reviewing its infringement procedures to ensure swifter, more automatic and predictable responses; recommends expanding infringement procedures to address systemic violations of single market rules; stresses the need to tackle regulatory fragmentation, which undermines the level playing field and legal certainty, while acknowledging Member States’ discretion provided for under the Treaties to implement directives;

Unlocking the full potential of the single market

15.  Encourages the Commission and the Member States to make use of the current compliance and cooperation toolkit more effectively and coherently; calls, in this regard, on the Commission to strengthen current enforcement and cooperation instruments, such as SOLVIT, product contact points and the Single Market Enforcement Taskforce, to tackle issues related to the functioning of the single market; encourages, furthermore, the Commission to perform an inventory of tools, mechanisms and processes used to develop legislative and non-legislative initiatives, and monitor and enforce compliance with EU legislation, with the objective of improving their coherence, eliminating duplications and consolidating and streamlining them, and, based on that inventory, to consider expanding current networks and tools; urges enforcement authorities and the competent bodies across the Member States to enhance cooperation and mutual support in order to address unjustified regulatory fragmentation and ensure more streamlined, fit-for-purpose and harmonised implementation of single market rules and expresses support for the creation of national-level coordination platforms to facilitate efficient and coherent implementation and transposition of EU rules;

16.  Emphasises the crucial role of the free movement of services in unlocking economic potential, while noting that integration in this sector remains weaker than in the goods sector, with an insufficient cross-border dimension of services in the single market; stresses, therefore, the need to ensure the consistent application of the Services Directive(4), whose implementation has only partially succeeded in achieving its intended goal owing to persisting unjustified barriers, which are particularly burdensome for SMEs and which take various forms and limit the ability to provide services across borders; notes the important role of the services sectors in the recently published single market strategy; calls for new initiatives and targeted and effective measures in key sectors for the single market which address the persisting unjustified barriers and enhance market integration without compromising on social standards, while also maintaining regulatory coherence and preventing the fragmentation of single market rules;

17.  Regrets the insufficient use of the notification procedure under the Services Directive; calls on the Member States to ensure the systematic, timely and transparent application of the notification procedures under the Services Directive and the Single Market Transparency Directive(5);

18.  Calls on the Commission to propose efficient legislative and non-legislative instruments to prevent new single market barriers when necessary and justified;

19.  Calls on the Commission to explore different methods to tackle territorial supply constraints, including non-legally required restrictions such as disproportionate language requirements for product labelling, as they constitute persistent barriers that decrease competition and impact the cost of living;

20.  Notes that simplifying administrative procedures, such as licensing and certification, and streamlining compliance processes is essential in order to reduce costs and legal uncertainties, particularly for SMEs; highlights that streamlined processes would enable SMEs to operate more effectively within the single market;

21.  Notes that inconsistency in the implementation, enforcement and coordination of EU rules hampers the effective functioning of the single market and could have negative effects on the free movement of workers and professionals; underlines that administrative obstacles and inconsistent recognition of qualifications risk increasing labour and skills shortages and weakening the EU’s competitiveness; urges the Commission to continue evaluating the application of the Professional Qualifications Directive(6) across Member States and identify measures to address inconsistencies in recognition processes; highlights the need for streamlined automatic procedures and fast-track mechanisms to facilitate the recognition of professional qualifications, particularly in sectors facing labour shortages; calls on the Commission to ensure that the single market rules for the free movement of workers respect the current social standards in the Member States while stressing the importance of removing unjustified barriers; strongly supports the digitalisation of the A1 form, required under Regulation (EC) No 883/2004(7), throughout all Member States to streamline procedures for cross-border provision of services;

22.  Considers that the single market plays a vital role in times of crisis if Member States act in a coordinated way; considers, in this respect, that the recently adopted Internal Market Emergency and Resilience Act (IMERA)(8) will be important to ensure such coordination so as to prevent shortages and ensure the smooth functioning of the single market, including the free movement of essential goods and services throughout the EU;

23.  Recalls the importance of common standards for the functioning of the single market; stresses the importance of safeguarding the EU standardisation system, while improving it where issues have been identified, and maintaining its operational integrity;

24.  Urges the Commission to identify and reduce unnecessary reporting burdens by implementing targeted measures, such as extending reporting intervals, eliminating redundant obligations and ensuring proportionality in sector-specific requirements, without compromising the policy objectives, which the requirements seek to implement; reiterates the need to ensure that reporting obligations stemming from various pieces of EU legislation are coherent; stresses the importance of the ‘think small first’ principle, of tailored approaches for SMEs and start-ups, and of fostering a digital business environment, enabled by trusted digital identities, secure data exchanges and legally recognised digital notifications; emphasises the importance of upholding the ‘once-only’ principle in order to streamline compliance procedures and reiterates the importance of harmonising reporting formats and digital interfaces across Member States where feasible; stresses that justified and proportionate reporting requirements are necessary to ensure proper monitoring and compliance with adopted rules, thereby ensuring effective enforcement and improved data collection to guide future policy initiatives;

25.  Emphasises that the new legislative framework aims to improve the internal market for goods and strengthen the conditions for placing a wide range of products on the EU market; calls on the Commission to revise it with a view to making it future-proof, ensuring its adaptability to evolving geopolitical challenges and to the requirements of the digital and green transitions, thus enhancing the overall competitiveness of the EU single market;

26.  Acknowledges the Commission’s intention to propose a new EU-wide legal regime, the ‘28th legal regime’, aimed at creating a business environment that supports the growth and upscaling of SMEs, including smaller and innovative companies, fostering EU global competitiveness; notes that the new regime could facilitate the development and deployment of the upcoming European Business Wallet;

Embracing digitalisation and artificial intelligence for growth and governance

27.  Welcomes the Commission’s planned fitness check on the legislative acquis in the digital policy area; demands that the Commission assesses and clarifies the legislative framework and the interplay between current EU legal acts, such as the Digital Services Act(9), the General Data Protection Regulation(10), the Artificial Intelligence Act(11), the Regulation on the Transparency and Targeting of Political Advertising(12), the Product Liability Directive(13), e-commerce and cybersecurity rules, and between these acts and future legislative initiatives before their adoption by the Commission; insists that regulators, networks of national authorities and stakeholders be involved in this process and stresses that the results of this mapping exercise should serve to identify potential overlapping, contradictory provisions and potential enforcement conflicts and address these shortcomings; in addition, it should serve to improve coordination between enforcement authorities across the Member States and the Commission’s internal services and to improve the ability of businesses to invest and innovate in the EU; insists that the Commission ensure that all laws adopted and enforced in the 2019-2024 Commission term are correctly and consistently implemented and applied across all of the Member States; calls on the Commission to include, where necessary and justified by impact assessments, proposals for simplification in the envisaged digital package, aimed at increasing coherency, legal clarity and predictability for all stakeholders, without undermining agreed policy objectives;

28.  Notes the upcoming Commission report on the interplay between the Digital Services Act and other legal acts, and encourages the Commission to clarify through this report the way in which this regulation interacts with other legal acts, including how to address possible overlaps, in order to support the effective implementation and enforcement of the EU digital rulebook and to provide legal certainty to service providers, users, consumers and regulatory authorities;

29.  Stresses that digital policy, especially in emerging technologies or in relation to highly complex technologies, should follow an iterative approach, also taking into account tools such as structured dialogue with businesses and other relevant stakeholders, co-regulation and regulatory sandboxes to ensure practical, proportionate and future-proof rules, designed with innovation in mind, while avoiding unintended consequences and assessing the impact of recently adopted legal acts before proposing new obligations; recalls the importance of common standards for the functioning of the digital single market; underlines the importance of EU leadership in the standardisation of digital technologies, as well as the critical importance of transatlantic and international cooperation, in this sphere, to ensure technological sovereignty and global competitiveness, in particular in emerging areas such as artificial intelligence and cloud services;

30.  Recognises the potential of digitalisation and artificial intelligence as key tools for boosting the EU’s competitiveness, reducing administrative burdens, streamlining and automating administrative procedures, including reporting, authorisation, permitting and compliance requirements, as well as for facilitating market entry and assessing applicable legislations; stresses the need to promote the uptake of these key tools to enhance regulatory efficiency, support better implementation and monitoring of single market legislation; notes that the varying level of digitalisation for administrations in the Member States constitutes a cross-border barrier;

31.  Believes that electronic tools and portals should be the standard for all reporting and administrative requirements and envisions their integration into a digital ‘one-stop shop’; calls on the Commission to explore the feasibility of such a digital ‘one-stop shop’ by expanding the Single Digital Gateway in order to facilitate a streamlined approach to accessing information, administrative procedures and assistance services for businesses and to offer more online services to both citizens and companies, particularly for SMEs, utilising digital public infrastructure such as the EU Digital Identity Wallets and the upcoming European Business Wallet, and ensuring consistency by streamlining such tools in all relevant legislative proposals;

32.  Underlines the importance of interoperability to reduce administrative burdens, particularly the need to make reporting obligations coherent and easy to fulfil, and calls on the Commission to continue exploring ways to improve and digitalise reporting procedures to improve information sharing and compliance while not overburdening companies, including automated business-to-government reporting; welcomes the Once-Only Technical System as a key tool to enable automated cross-border data exchange and reduce duplicative reporting burdens for businesses; emphasises that any requirements for data sharing and reporting should be designed with digitalisation in mind, ensuring that data sharing and reporting requirements can be data-driven and automated;

33.  Calls on the Commission to streamline current IT tools available to economic operators and relevant national authorities for notifying and communicating relevant information such as information on accidents, corrective measures and other data on the safety of products in the single market; highlights that a single IT tool should be developed in order to reduce time and costs and to increase compliance and enforcement;

34.  Calls on the Commission to improve the development of compliance tools such as codes of practice, ensuring that they remain within the limits of underlying legal obligations, are practically implementable for companies of all sizes, and are developed through meaningful and timely stakeholder consultations;

35.  Stresses the need for modern and robust digital infrastructure to facilitate the EU’s ambitions in digitalisation and frontier technologies; calls for continued investment in developing ‘digital highways’ that include cross-border high-capacity broadband networks, 5G corridors, secure cloud and edge infrastructure, as well as interoperable digital public services;

36.  Calls for the harmonised rollout of digital labelling and the Digital Product Passport in EU product legislation; stresses their potential to lower compliance burdens, enhance consumer access to accurate information, and support multilingual interoperability while preserving the possibility for consumers’ products to be accompanied by essential information related to safety in paper format; urges the Commission to facilitate the development of harmonised standards and detailed guidance to avoid fragmentation and facilitate SME participation in cross-border trade;

Improving consumer protection in the digital age

37.  Highlights that the streamlining of consumer protection legislation should not lower the current high standard of consumer protection across the EU; acknowledges the significant progress made in strengthening consumer protection rules and adapting them to new technological and sustainability realities; underlines the need to further strengthen consumer protection, such as in the area of e-commerce with regard to false or misleading product information; emphasises that effective enforcement and a thorough analysis of the consumer protection laws and their impact is important; insists that new legislative initiatives should focus on closing gaps in current legislation or address new substantiated challenges that are not tackled within the current legal framework;

38.  Highlights that the rapid expansion of digital platforms and e-commerce has introduced new market dynamics and has created advanced opportunities and challenges and risks for users; acknowledges that the Digital Markets Act(14) and the Digital Services Act constitute important legislative instruments to ensure fair competition, contestability and fairness in digital platforms, while also fostering a safer, trustful and more transparent digital environment and consumer protection in the digital economy, and calls for proper enforcement of this technology legislation to ensure genuine, autonomous and informed consumer choice, protection and fair competition;

39.  Reaffirms that consumer protection laws should remain mainly principle-based and coherent across various legal instruments, but should also allow for more specific provisions when necessary for legal certainty for both businesses and consumers; stresses the importance of avoiding excessive or redundant information obligations, which may impose unnecessary burdens on businesses without enhancing consumer understanding; calls for proportionate and purpose-driven consumer information obligations; notes that, according to the 2025 Consumer Condition Scoreboard, most consumers are not aware of their rights; calls on the Commission and the Member States to develop campaigns to increase consumer awareness;

40.  Urges the Commission to use digital tools to enhance transparency and consumer trust in cross-border transactions; calls for effective enforcement of consumer redress mechanisms, including those concerning collective redress, and the full enforcement of consumer rights in the EU, including through a revision of the Consumer Protection Cooperation Regulation(15), focusing on improving cross-border enforcement; underlines, furthermore, the importance of the revision of the Consumer Protection Cooperation Regulation to improve cross-border enforcement and to address unfair behaviour, particularly by non-EU traders; notes the importance of strengthening cooperation among Member States’ various competent authorities, including through coordinated joint-enforcement projects and streamlining the exchange of information;

o
o   o

41.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission.

(1) OJ C 214, 16.6.2023, p. 8. (2) https://single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu/publications/2025-annual-single-market-and-competitiveness-report_en; https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/600621587713071010/pdf/Doing-Business-in-the-European-Union-2020-Greece-Ireland-and-Italy.pdf; https://www.weforum.org/stories/2024/09/wind-energy-permitting-processes-europe/. (3) Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission on Better Law-Making (OJ L 123, 12.5.2016, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/agree_interinstit/2016/512/oj). (4) Directive 2006/123/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on services in the internal market (OJ L 376, 27.12.2006, p. 36, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2006/123/oj). (5) Directive (EU) 2015/1535 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 September 2015 laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical regulations and of rules on Information Society services (OJ L 241, 17.9.2015, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2015/1535/oj). (6) Directive 2005/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 September 2005 on the recognition of professional qualifications (OJ L 255, 30.9.2005, p. 22, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2005/36/oj). (7) Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the coordination of social security systems (OJ L 166, 30.4.2004, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2004/883/oj). (8) Regulation (EU) 2024/2747 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 October 2024 establishing a framework of measures related to an internal market emergency and to the resilience of the internal market and amending Council Regulation (EC) No 2679/98 (Internal Market Emergency and Resilience Act) (OJ L, 2024/2747, 8.11.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/2747/oj). (9) Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 October 2022 on a Single Market For Digital Services and amending Directive 2000/31/EC (Digital Services Act) (OJ L 277, 27.10.2022, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2022/2065/oj). (10) Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/679/oj). (11) Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence and amending Regulations (EC) No 300/2008, (EU) No 167/2013, (EU) No 168/2013, (EU) 2018/858, (EU) 2018/1139 and (EU) 2019/2144 and Directives 2014/90/EU, (EU) 2016/797 and (EU) 2020/1828 (Artificial Intelligence Act) (OJ L, 2024/1689, 12.7.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj). (12) Regulation (EU) 2024/900 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 March 2024 on the transparency and targeting of political advertising (OJ L, 2024/900, 20.3.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/900/oj). (13) Directive (EU) 2024/2853 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2024 on liability for defective products and repealing Council Directive 85/374/EEC (OJ L, 2024/2853, 18.11.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/2853/oj). (14) Regulation (EU) 2022/1925 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 September 2022 on contestable and fair markets in the digital sector and amending Directives (EU) 2019/1937 and (EU) 2020/1828 (Digital Markets Act) (OJ L 265, 12.10.2022, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2022/1925/oj). (15) Regulation (EU) 2017/2394 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2017 on cooperation between national authorities responsible for the enforcement of consumer protection laws and repealing Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 (OJ L 345, 27.12.2017, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2017/2394/oj).

European Parliament resolution of 11 September 2025 on the stocktaking of the European elections 2024 (2025/2012(INI))

P10_TA(2025)0198 A10-0156/2025

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Treaty on European Union (TEU), and in particular Articles 10, 14 and 17(7) thereof,

–  having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), and in particular Articles 20 and 22 thereof,

–  having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, and in particular Articles 21, 39 and 52(1) thereof,

–  having regard to the Declaration on Article 17(6) and (7) of the Treaty on European Union annexed to the Final Act of the Intergovernmental Conference which adopted the Treaty of Lisbon,

–  having regard to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and in particular Article 25 thereof,

–  having regard to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD), and in particular Article 29 thereof,

–  having regard to Council Directive 93/109/EC of 6 December 1993 laying down detailed arrangements for the exercise of the right to vote and stand as a candidate in elections to the European Parliament for citizens of the Union residing in a Member State of which they are not nationals(1),

–  having regard to Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2018/994 of 13 July 2018 amending the Act concerning the election of the members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage, annexed to Council Decision 76/787/ECSC, EEC, Euratom of 20 September 1976(2),

–  having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1141/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2014 on the statute and funding of European political parties and European political foundations(3),

–  having regard to the amendments it adopted on 15 September 2022 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the statute and funding of European political parties and European political foundations(4),

–  having regard to the Commission proposal of 25 November 2021 for a Council directive laying down detailed arrangements for the exercise of the right to vote and stand as a candidate in elections to the European Parliament for Union citizens residing in a Member State of which they are not nationals (COM(2021)0732),

–  having regard to Regulation (EU) 2024/900 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 March 2024 on the transparency and targeting of political advertising(5),

–  having regard to Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 October 2022 on a Single Market For Digital Services and amending Directive 2000/31/EC (Digital Services Act)(6),

–  having regard to Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence and amending Regulations (EC) No 300/2008, (EU) No 167/2013, (EU) No 168/2013, (EU) 2018/858, (EU) 2018/1139 and (EU) 2019/2144 and Directives 2014/90/EU, (EU) 2016/797 and (EU) 2020/1828 (Artificial Intelligence Act)(7),

–  having regard to the Cooperation Agreement between the European Parliament and the European Committee of the Regions of 13 May 2024,

–  having regard to the Memorandum of Understanding between the European Parliament and the European Committee of the Regions of 28 February 2024 on cooperation in the run-up to 2024 elections,

–  having regard to its position of 3 May 2022 on the proposal for a Council Regulation on the election of the members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage, repealing Council Decision (76/787/ECSC, EEC, Euratom) and the Act concerning the election of the members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage annexed to that Decision(8),

–  having regard to its resolution of 26 November 2020 on stocktaking of European elections(9),

–  having regard to its resolution of 12 December 2023 on the European Elections 2024(10),

–  having regard to its decision of 27 November 2024 on the election of the Commission(11),

–  having regard to the Commission communication of 3 December 2020 entitled ‘European Democracy Action Plan’ (COM(2020)0790) and its subsequent ‘Defence of Democracy’ package of December 2023,

–  having regard to its decision of 18 December 2024 on setting up a special committee on the European Democracy Shield, and defining its responsibilities, numerical strength and term of office(12),

–  having regard to its resolution of 22 November 2023 on proposals of the European Parliament for the amendment of the Treaties(13),

–  having regard to the report on the final outcome of the Conference on the Future of Europe of May 2022,

–  having regard to the Commission’s Enlargement Package of 30 October 2024,

–  having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs (A10-0156/2025),

A.  whereas the 2024 European elections registered the highest turnout of any elections to the European Parliament in the past 25 years, at 50,74 % of the electorate, (a slight increase in comparison to 2019 with 50,66 %), sending a positive and significant signal about European citizens’ interest in EU affairs; whereas participation figures varied widely among Member States, ranging from 89,01 % to 21,35 %, underlining the need for continued political investment in election participation across the EU;

B.  whereas the 2024 European elections were held simultaneously with parliamentary elections in two Member States, with local and regional elections in eight Member States and a referendum in one Member State;

C.  whereas in most Member States a higher turnout compared to the previous European elections was recorded;

D.  whereas suffrage rights were expanded in a few Member States that lowered the voting age to 16, resulting in an additional total of two million eligible voters below the age of 18; whereas some Member States have lowered the age limit for candidates to 18, while in others it has remained at 25; whereas overall, up to 25 million young people have voted for the first time;

E.  whereas according to the Eurobarometer post-electoral survey, young people’s participation in the European elections (under 25s) fell by 6 % compared to the 2019 elections, dropping from 42 % in 2019 to 36 % in 2024; whereas turnout among young people should remain a focal point of policy efforts in the years to come;

F.  whereas there is insufficient uniform and granular data available on the participation of vulnerable groups or on the use of alternative voting methods; whereas national frameworks for the collection of data pertaining to the European elections should be further harmonised to support evidence-based policy solutions at EU level;

G.  whereas around 18 400 candidates and 490 candidate lists stood on the ballots, campaigning under different electoral arrangements largely governed by national provisions across the Member States; whereas candidate registration and campaign periods ranged from several months to a few weeks; whereas independent individual candidacy was not possible in nine Member States;

H.  whereas significant differences in regulatory approaches and restrictions between the Member States on voting and candidacy rights remain; whereas important reforms aimed at aligning electoral rules and procedures across the Union have yet to be completed;

I.  whereas the most recent Eurobarometer suggests that in the 2024 European elections people were motivated to vote for reasons concerning shared European issues such as the cost of living, the economy, migration, the rule of law and climate change; whereas in national debates these issues are often exclusively approached from a national policy angle; whereas political parties and candidates have a responsibility to adequately inform citizens about the policy response and governance at EU level, including informing citizens about the European political parties and political groups they are affiliated with in Parliament;

J.  whereas in the absence of a centralised European voter register, data exchange among Member States on possible multiple entries remains a challenge, not least because data about dual citizenship is not available;

K.  whereas special measures foster electoral participation and representation of under-represented and vulnerable groups; whereas 11 Member States have legislated a quota for women;

L.  whereas around 11 million EU citizens living in another Member State were eligible to vote in their country of residence; whereas they still face administrative barriers to their participation in their country of residence; whereas Parliament’s position of 14 February 2023, which sought to address these barriers, was ignored by the Council;

M.  whereas a healthy democracy relies on voters having access to a wide range of ideas, perspectives and information; whereas freedom of speech ensures that candidates, parties, media and citizens can express opinions, debate policies and share facts freely – helping voters make informed choices;

N.  whereas a healthy political debate is negatively affected by disinformation; whereas the spread of disinformation, including, but not limited to, social media, continues to pose a growing systemic threat to European electoral and democratic processes; whereas the Commission opened infringement procedures and began investigations against certain large online platforms, including for deceptive political advertising and lack of content monitoring and moderation, stemming from a lack of appointment of national digital services coordinators or lack of empowerment of the relevant bodies to perform the tasks required by the Digital Services Act (DSA); whereas, in particular, the social media platform X (formerly Twitter) and its owner Elon Musk continue to openly defy EU regulatory authorities through company policy and communications;

O.  whereas most of the provisions of the new Regulation (EU) 2024/900 on the transparency and targeting of political advertising had not yet entered into effect when the European elections took place; whereas this Regulation is expected to complement the DSA and to bolster the EU’s resilience to election interference;

P.  whereas improving the representation of persons with disabilities in Parliament is crucial to fostering a truly inclusive and diverse legislative body;

Q.  whereas young Europeans constitute 25 % of the total EU population, while only 10 % of the seats in Parliament are occupied by elected members under 30 years old;

R.  whereas the 2024 elections show an overall decline in female representation across Parliament, with women now holding approximately 38,6 % of the seats, down from 40 % in 2019;

S.  whereas recent geopolitical turmoil, including the COVID-19 pandemic, Russia’s unprovoked and unjustified full-scale war of aggression against Ukraine, and a worrying shift in transatlantic relations, has been a catalyst for disinformation narratives;

T.  whereas the upcoming enlargement will require a deep reform of the institutional set-up of the Union, possibly involving its electoral framework; whereas a Union of more than 30 Member States can only be a relevant and independent global player and can only properly function if its decision-making is made less bureaucratic and more efficient and is built on the basis of a truly European, transnational and shared democratic sphere;

European democracy after the 2024 European elections

1.  Recalls that the fitness and ability of the EU to tackle the challenges of the 21st century on behalf of its citizens largely depends on its ability to maintain and foster healthy democratic debates while ensuring the resilience and integrity of its elections and democratic processes; stresses that these cannot be taken for granted and must be strengthened and protected through a coherent policy framework; is convinced that this work is far from complete and that policy efforts must be intensified to boost participation in elections and to make the Union less bureaucratic and more democratic and effective in its decision-making;

2.  Welcomes the relatively high turnout for the 10th European elections, which, with an aggregate participation rate of 50,74 %, saw a slight increase compared to the 2019 elections; is convinced that these figures reflect stronger public engagement with the European project and the increasing importance of Parliament and its impact on the daily lives of citizens; is nevertheless concerned by the widely divergent participation rates among Member States and remains determined to strengthen policy efforts to close the gap and increase turnout among all groups across the EU;

3.  Applauds efforts by the European institutions and the European Broadcasting Union to increase the continent-wide visibility of candidates in the European elections, including through a series of high-profile pan-European debates, bringing together lead candidates from the different political families, as well as through the ‘Get out the vote’ debates, raising awareness among young Europeans; welcomes the positive impact of its own institutional communication strategy, which sought to raise awareness about the elections by highlighting their importance through the slogan ‘Use your vote, or others will decide for you’; believes that cooperation among institutions and with Member States’ electoral authorities with a view to increasing voter turnout has improved and undertakes to enhance coordination efforts in this area; calls for further substantial investment to expand the reach of these campaigns and broadcasts for the 2029 elections; underlines the important and positive role of the European Parliament Liaison Offices in the European elections;

4.  Underlines that the creation of a European ‘demos’ and shared democratic space firstly requires a cultural shift on the basis of a long-term strategy and adequate resources for the strengthening of European awareness and citizenship, in close cooperation with civil society and societal stakeholders; regrets that campaigns conducted in the Member States for the European elections are all too often approached from a purely national policy angle, even when these campaigns address common European issues; calls on national political parties and candidates in the European elections as well as national media outlets to adequately and truthfully inform citizens about governance at EU level, including about the European political parties and Parliament’s political groups that national parties are affiliated with; encourages national parties to intensify the cooperation with their European counterparts in this regard and to improve their European visibility; undertakes to create an enabling regulatory environment for this;

5.  Stresses that more work must be done to increase the participation of under-represented groups in the European elections; is concerned by the decrease in turnout among young people and undertakes to ramp up policy efforts to increase electoral campaign outreach to this key demographic; notes that young peoples’ involvement in the future of the EU is crucial; encourages the Member States to adopt dedicated policy frameworks addressing both voting and candidacy facilities, including through specific information campaigns, and alternative voting methods such as postal and proxy voting; recognises the need to continue progressing towards a more inclusive electoral process to ensure that every citizen has an equal opportunity to participate in the democratic process; notes that only a few Members of the European Parliament belong to national and ethnic minorities that are officially recognised as minorities in the Member States in accordance with their constitutional or legal frameworks and relevant Council of Europe instruments; underlines that the fight against racism, discrimination and exclusion is a duty that derives from the EU’s fundamental values and the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights; calls on the Member States and national political parties to adopt proactive and proportionate measures to foster the effective inclusion and representation of such minorities, including Roma communities, in the European elections, in full respect of national constitutional orders;

6.  Highlights that the elections to Parliament might not have been fair in Hungary; stresses in this context that the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) Election Observation Mission Final Report(14) for the parliamentary elections and referendum in Hungary on 3 April 2022 found the ‘absence of a level playing field’; stresses that the Hungarian Government bears responsibility for the restoration of compliance with EU law and the values enshrined in Article 2 TEU and expresses deep regret that the lack of decisive EU action has contributed to a breakdown in democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights in Hungary, turning the country into a hybrid regime of electoral autocracy, according to the relevant indices; expresses concern about several requests by the Hungarian Central Investigative Prosecutor to lift the immunity of MEPs;

7.  Reiterates its long-held view that further reforms of and adjustments to the EU electoral framework are necessary to make the European elections more democratic, resilient, inclusive and truly European; points to several pending policy initiatives in this regard and repeats its calls on the Council of the EU and the European Council to collaborate constructively with Parliament to find policy solutions that work in the interest of European citizens;

Institutional and electoral reform

8.  Is convinced that the regulatory framework for the European elections must be revised and modernised to increase the electoral footprint of citizens and reduce the regulatory fragmentation among the 27 Member States, including through a single common voting day as well as a uniform minimum voting age; recalls that Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2018/994 is expected to bring significant positive steps in this sense, as would a number of submissions from the pending proposal of 3 May 2022 for a new electoral law; reiterates its call on the Council to engage constructively with Parliament to enable a swift approval; recalls that 26 of the 27 Member States have already ratified the 2018 revision and undertakes to critically evaluate why its implementation was delayed in various Member States;

9.  Regrets that new proposed rules regarding the right to vote and to stand as a candidate in elections to Parliament for ‘mobile citizens’ were not adopted by the Council in time for the 2024 elections; points out that the full exercise of the electoral rights granted by the Treaties to mobile citizens in elections to Parliament is still hampered by unjustified barriers to democratic participation, including a lack of awareness about the applicable conditions and rules; acknowledges that the pending draft Council directive would address some of these barriers; regrets, however, that the Council, while formally in compliance with Article 22(2) TFEU, has not engaged with the substance of Parliament’s opinion in any meaningful way; reiterates, in particular, its proposals to enable registration on the electoral roll as soon as voters register their place of residence and to strengthen language and information requirements for local authorities, as well as to facilitate the exercise of the right to vote by under-represented groups of voters and to enhance awareness-raising campaigns by Member States with the active involvement of civil society; calls on the Member States to ensure that their citizens living abroad can participate in European elections, including by strengthening consular services and enabling postal voting; stresses the importance of all Member States in ensuring unhindered access to polling stations for elderly people and persons with disabilities;

10.  Strongly supports efforts by political parties to further develop the implementation of the lead candidate (Spitzenkandidaten) process to establish a link between the election, the composition of Parliament, and the nomination of the President of the Commission so as to make the appointment of the EU executive more transparent for citizens; underlines that this process enabled citizens to effectively influence the nomination of the Commission President, marking a significant step forward, with a direct role for citizens; commends the European political parties for nominating their candidates well in advance of the election; notes that this process this time around was relatively successful as the Commission President, while not being directly electable through a ballot, ran as the lead candidate for the political group that received the most votes; points out that the election, through the European elections, of the Commission President would increase their accountability and democratic legitimacy; remains convinced, however, that several key success factors – such as the continued development and consolidation of the European democratic sphere – are still lacking, preventing the full realisation of the potential of this informal and unregulated political process;

11.  Emphasises the important role of European political parties in contributing to the debate on European public policy issues and in forming European political awareness; believes that these parties can offer a much-needed counterweight to the spread of disinformation and misinformation in the run-up to the elections; welcomes the agreement reached on the recast of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1141/2014 on the statute and funding of European political parties and European political foundations, which closes remaining loopholes, brings legal clarity and helps unshackle European political parties and empower them to assume the role they are given by the Treaties, including by boosting their visibility in the Member States during the electoral campaign and in the promotion of lead candidates;

12.  Calls on the Member States to implement a ban on foreign donations, including both in-kind and cash contributions or benefits, and a limit on donations to political parties and candidates; considers that political actors who have been offered and/or accepted a financial or in-kind contribution by a foreign actor must be obliged to report it to the competent authorities and this information should be reported in turn at EU level to allow for EU-wide monitoring;

13.  Stresses the need to strengthen the role and visibility of European political foundations in the European democratic sphere; recalls that these foundations play a key role in developing political debate, policy research and civic education across borders, thereby contributing to the formation of a truly European public opinion; calls for the provision of adequate tools and resources to enable them to support European political parties in their effort to engage citizens, promote European values and participate meaningfully in future electoral campaigns; recalls that the upcoming report of the Commission on the application of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1141/2014 on the statute and funding of European political parties and European political foundations (pending recast) should pay particular attention to the rules governing the financing of European political foundations and should propose amendments to the Regulation if necessary;

14.  Underlines that further institutional work must be done to strengthen the impact of European voters on the governance of the EU; points in this regard to the pending Treaty change procedure, which was triggered in the wake of the Conference on the Future of Europe; highlights its proposal to reverse the roles of the Council and Parliament in the nomination and confirmation of the President of the Commission to more accurately reflect the results of European elections; highlights also its proposal to grant Parliament the right of legislative initiative, the implementation of which would create a direct link between votes cast by citizens for parliamentary representatives and the policy output at EU level; highlights also its proposal to modernise the right of inquiry of Parliament to strengthen democratic control over the EU executive; calls on the European Council to comply with the Treaties and hold a vote on the convening of the convention without undue delay to discuss these proposals;

Institutional resilience

15.  Underlines the importance of strengthening the link between local, regional, national and European issues; welcomes, in this regard, the active and positive involvement of local and regional leaders in European topics and debates, notably in the pre-electoral period, including through the work of the Committee of the Regions and its networks and campaigns;

16.  Recalls that fighting anti-democratic rhetoric is most effective at the level closest to citizens, including through the active involvement of local and regional leaders; in this respect, especially in regions facing economic stagnation where long-term disparities intensify support for Eurosceptic parties, underlines the positive role of EU cohesion policy, which must prioritise essential regional needs, ensuring no one is left behind;

17.  Expresses deep concern about a growing number of internal and external threats that are eroding the fabric of European democracy; condemns the fact that some candidates, including those from governing parties in Member States, openly campaigned on false and foreign-sponsored narratives about the EU while drumming up anti-EU sentiment;

18.  Reiterates its deep and long-standing concern over the persisting trend of malicious interference in European democratic processes, including disinformation; expresses its deep concern that some Member States’ governments are actively contributing to the dissemination of disinformation; condemns in particular the online disinformation campaigns sponsored by Russian and other non-EU state and non-state actors undertaken to polarise and sow mistrust among the European electorate; notes that foreign interference occurs prior to elections and peaks in the pre-electoral period; denounces several Members of the European Parliament who willingly engaged with the Voice of Europe media platform, which is subject to a criminal investigation, to promote Kremlin-sponsored narratives about the war of aggression in Ukraine;

19.  Reiterates its call on the Commission and the Member States to ramp up efforts to combat foreign interference and disinformation through a multilayer, coordinated and cross-sector strategy, supported by adequate financial resources, to equip the EU and its Member States with appropriate foresight and resilience policies and deterrence tools; in this regard, calls on the Commission, the European External Action Service and the Member States to further reinforce the Union’s strategic response to disinformation and foreign information manipulation and interference, and points to numerous EU policy efforts undertaken in recent years, including the DSA, the strengthened Code of Practice on Disinformation and the initiatives under the Democracy Action Plan; acknowledges with concern that online platforms exert disproportionate influence over public discourse; notes with concern reports of politically motivated decisions by certain platforms that may threaten freedom of expression and democratic pluralism;

20.  Underlines the importance of a balanced and free media environment in the Member States as a key pillar of European democracy, notably in electoral cycles; acknowledges that, while the EU is a global leader in media freedom and 2024 saw the adoption of the European Media Freedom Act and the coming into force of the anti-SLAAP Directive(15), the increasing internal and external pressure on the EU’s media environment requires further strengthening of media freedom in the EU, including in the run-up to European elections; recalls that in certain Member States, 2024 saw an increase in attacks on journalists;

21.  Condemns all forms of political violence in the strongest terms; expresses deep concern over a series of incidents that occurred in the run-up to the 2024 elections; encourages the Commission and the Member States to prioritise the prevention of political violence by strengthening laws, frameworks and policies that protect politicians, political candidates, activists, journalists and citizens from violence and harassment during the electoral period; underlines the importance of a comprehensive approach that includes prevention, protection and education in order to reduce the incidence of political violence, especially by promoting awareness of the dangers of political violence and fostering a culture of tolerance and respect for differing political opinions; highlights that election fraud does not begin on election day, but with the dismantling of the rule of law, democratic principles, freedom of the press, freedom of expression, and with the spreading of foreign disinformation and propaganda; notes with concern that systemic challenges may impact the extent to which free and fair elections are upheld consistently across all Member States;

22.  Is deeply concerned by the rise and electoral success of anti-system and openly anti-EU parties during the 2024 elections; points out that this shift leads to the radicalisation of political discourse and further polarisation of Parliament, and moreover, also provides a wider platform for the dissemination of foreign disinformation and propaganda; condemns any form of political rhetoric that promotes hate speech, discrimination, xenophobia or violence, and urges all political actors to engage in constructive, fact-based dialogue that respects democratic values, human rights and the rule of law; undertakes to further reform and improve the functioning of the Union to better deliver on the expectations of citizens; calls on all relevant players to communicate more proactively about the EU’s positive contribution to the daily lives and security of all European citizens through its policies;

23.  Commits to an evaluation of these frameworks through its Special Committee on the European Democracy Shield, whose mandate, received from the plenary, includes addressing interference in democratic processes and policies, and implementing measures to preserve the fairness and integrity of elections as well as policies contributing to EU democratic processes; highlights that the committee thus serves as a key tool to prevent malicious interference by identifying possible loopholes, gaps and overlaps that could be exploited; calls in parallel on the Commission to enforce these regulatory frameworks in full and without undue delay, particularly in the case of those platforms that continue to openly defy EU regulatory authorities;

24.  Recognises the importance of cybersecurity and cyber infrastructure in protecting the integrity of European elections; warns against the potential risks of AI-enabled influence operations;

25.  Points out that the results of national elections also indirectly influence the composition of European institutions, e.g. through the nomination of Commissioners-designate or the participation of the sitting national political majorities in Council meetings; in this context, emphasises the importance of the democratic nature of general elections in every Member State;

26.  Concludes that European democracy can only thrive as long as European democratic and electoral processes are strengthened and defended; in this respect, underlines the importance of promoting free and fair elections while protecting their integrity against both internal and external threats to the EU’s democracy; notes with concern that the spread of disinformation and some social media platforms’ influence remain unchecked; underlines the utmost importance of enforcing the entire legal framework currently in place in order to safeguard the integrity of the entire electoral process;

o
o   o

27.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission.

(1) OJ L 329, 30.12.1993, p. 34, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/1993/109/oj. (2) OJ L 178, 16.7.2018, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec/2018/994/oj. (3) OJ L 317, 4.11.2014, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2014/1141/oj. (4) OJ C 125, 5.4.2023, p. 485. (5) OJ L, 2024/900, 20.3.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/900/oj. (6) OJ L 277, 27.10.2022, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2022/2065/oj. (7) OJ L, 2024/1689, 12.7.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj. (8) OJ C 465, 6.12.2022, p. 171. (9) OJ C 425, 20.10.2021, p. 98. (10) OJ C, C/2024/4160, 2.8.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/4160/oj. (11) OJ C, C/2025/1811, 4.4.2025, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/1811/oj. (12) OJ C, C/2025/1981, 11.4.2025, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/1981/oj. (13) OJ C, C/2024/4216, 24.7.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/4216/oj. (14) ODIHR Election Observation Mission Final Report – Hungary, 2022. (15) Directive (EU) 2024/1069 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 April 2024 on protecting persons who engage in public participation from manifestly unfounded claims or abusive court proceedings (‘Strategic lawsuits against public participation’) (OJ L, 2024/1069, 16.4.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1069/oj).

European Parliament resolution of 11 September 2025 on Gaza at breaking point: EU action to combat famine, the urgent need to release hostages and move towards a two-state solution (2025/2852(RSP))

P10_TA(2025)0199 RC-B10-0372/2025

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to Rules 136(2) and (4) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is marked by a decades-long record of occupation, recurrent disregard of international law and UN resolutions, and repeated cycles of violence and terrorist attacks;

B.  whereas Hamas committed a despicable attack on 7 October 2023, in which 1 200 people were killed and 250 were taken hostage; whereas an estimated 48 hostages remain in captivity in Gaza, around 20 of whom are believed to still be alive;

C.  whereas in response to Hamas’s attack, Israel launched the military operation ‘Swords of Iron’, with the stated goal of liberating the Israeli hostages held in Gaza and dismantling Hamas’s military capabilities; whereas on 4 May 2025, Israel’s Security Cabinet approved a military plan with the code name ‘Operation Gideon’s Chariots’ that aimed to ‘capture the entire Gaza Strip’ and seize control of the territory;

D.  whereas since the beginning of the disproportionate military response by the Israeli Government in Gaza, more than 63 000 Palestinians have been killed, of whom more than 17 000 were children according to UNICEF, and more than 15 000 Palestinians have been injured;

E.  whereas the humanitarian situation in Gaza is unbearable, with the civilian population in the Gaza Strip now entirely dependent on humanitarian aid; whereas humanitarian aid should never be instrumentalised and should reach civilians in need without obstruction or manipulation, in full compliance with international humanitarian law;

F.  whereas continued diplomatic outreach by the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (VP/HR) to her Israeli counterpart led to an agreement on humanitarian arrangements to improve the humanitarian situation in Gaza;

G.  whereas monitoring of the humanitarian arrangements reveals that some progress has been made, including increased access for trucks and fuel, the opening of additional crossing points, the continued operation of the Egyptian and Jordanian routes, and repairs to critical infrastructure; whereas these measures remain insufficient to address the vast humanitarian needs of Gaza’s population;

H.  whereas there is an ongoing case before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on the Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip (South Africa v Israel), brought on 29 December 2023;

1.  Expresses great alarm at the catastrophic humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip, notably the lack of food and widespread malnutrition resulting from insufficient access to humanitarian aid; reiterates that distribution sites, civilians, humanitarian workers and medical staff must be protected and must not become targets of military action; underlines the urgent need for all experienced international humanitarian bodies to have full, rapid, safe and unhindered access to and throughout the entire Gaza Strip, with an emphasis on providing essentials such as food, water, medical supplies and shelter, in line with international law, and demands the immediate restoration of vital infrastructure; emphasises the obligations of the parties to the conflict, under international humanitarian law, regarding the provision of humanitarian assistance;

2.  Strongly condemns the obstruction of humanitarian aid to Gaza by the Israeli Government, which has caused a famine in northern Gaza; is particularly alarmed by the report issued by the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC), backed by the Food and Agriculture Organization, the World Food Programme and UNICEF, issuing a critical alert on famine;

3.  Demands the unimpeded and large-scale provision of humanitarian assistance, particularly food, medical care and psychosocial support for children, and protection to all those in need throughout the Gaza Strip; calls for the opening of all relevant border crossings, and for the mandate and funding of the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) to be reinstated in full, with strong oversight and accountability; strongly opposes the current aid distribution system in Gaza;

4.  Calls for stronger efforts by all parties to guarantee that aid reaches all civilians safely;

5.  Calls for an immediate and permanent ceasefire; calls for the immediate and unconditional release of all Israeli hostages being held in Gaza, both living and deceased; calls for the International Committee of the Red Cross to be given immediate access to all Israeli hostages being held in Gaza so that it can provide them with medical care; calls for the EU institutions and the Member States to use their diplomatic leverage in respect of third countries to apply pressure on Hamas to accept the release of all hostages;

6.  Condemns once again, in the strongest possible terms, the barbaric crimes perpetrated by Hamas against Israel; calls for the EU to adopt further firm and concrete sanctions against the terrorist organisation Hamas;

7.  Reiterates its commitment to Israel’s security and reaffirms Israel’s inalienable right to invoke self-defence in full compliance with international law, and recognises that Israel remains a strategic EU partner in countering regional terrorism, including threats from the Islamic Republic of Iran and its proxies;

8.  Condemns the continuous attacks on Israel by Houthi rebels, Hezbollah and Iran; stresses that the Iranian regime continues to constitute a threat to Israel’s security, while Israel retains the right to adopt all measures it deems necessary to counter and diminish Iranian aggression and interference;

9.  Stresses that Israel’s right to defend itself cannot justify indiscriminate military action in Gaza and in the region; expresses concern over the continuous military operations in the Gaza Strip, which have led to unbearable suffering for the civilian population, particularly children, who are bearing the brunt of this war; equally condemns Hamas’s deliberate abuse of civilian infrastructure and its use of the population as human shields; calls for the application of the updated EU Guidelines on Children and Armed Conflict as a framework for action, prioritising the rights, safety and well-being of children;

10.  Condemns the repeated violations of international humanitarian and human rights law in Gaza, including mass forcible transfers, which are prohibited except when they are carried out to ensure civilian security or for imperative military reasons; calls on Israel to stop engaging in practices that cause disproportionate civilian harm, the destruction of infrastructure and forced displacement;

11.  Supports the goal of fully defeating the terrorist organisation Hamas, to prevent this EU-designated terrorist organisation from posing a threat to Jewish and Israeli lives ever again; warns that Hamas’s political ideology prevents it from ever being a political partner; regrets Hamas’s public support for the deadly terrorist attack perpetrated in Jerusalem on 8 September 2025, which confirms that this terrorist group entirely lacks the legitimacy to participate in the future governance of the Gaza Strip;

12.  Reaffirms that Hamas and other terrorist organisations cannot be allowed to retain any political or military control in the Gaza Strip;

13.  Urges all Member States to comply with their obligations under the Rome Statute, to enforce all arrest warrants issued by the International Criminal Court (ICC), and to reaffirm their political and financial support for the ICC and the ICJ; recalls that the ICJ’s binding orders must be implemented fully, including with regard to ensuring humanitarian access to Gaza; stresses that accountability for violations of international humanitarian law and human rights law is essential for any sustainable peace; calls on all parties to respect the independence of international judicial institutions; insists that all perpetrators of human rights violations must be held to account;

14.  Expresses outrage at the killing of 248 journalists and 508 humanitarian workers, as well as the repeated attacks on hospitals and humanitarian convoys; demands independent investigations into the killings and calls for those responsible to be held to account;

15.  Considers it essential to carry out a full investigation into all war crimes and violations of international law, and for all those responsible to be held to account;

16.  Urges the Commission to activate the blocking statute to protect European operators from the effects of US sanctions and help ensure that the ICC’s work can continue unaffected, and urges the EU and its Member States to take any other diplomatic and practical steps necessary to defend the ICC and those cooperating with it, in line with the Member States’ legally binding commitments to promote the universality and integrity of the Rome Statute;

17.  Supports the actions and campaigns advanced by civil society organisations and activists with the aim of promoting concrete efforts to end the famine in Gaza and to stop the crimes being committed there;

18.  Calls on the Commission to ensure that its proposed EUR 1,6 billion comprehensive support programme for the Palestinian Authority and Gaza is fully transparent and is subject to strict oversight and effective conditionality to ensure that EU taxpayer money does not support terrorism or incitement to hatred and violence;

19.  Expresses its solidarity with the Christians in Gaza and the West Bank and underlines that they play an essential humanitarian and social role, despite being a tiny minority;

20.  Fully supports the current EU sanctions enacted against violent Israeli settlers and activists in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem; calls for the EU to follow the decisions of several Member States and the United Kingdom to issue sanctions against Israeli Minister of Finance Bezalel Smotrich and Minister of National Security Itamar Ben-Gvir; supports the extension of sanctions and calls for targeted EU restrictive measures, including asset freezes and visa bans through the EU’s Global Human Rights Sanctions Regime, to be applied to extremist individuals and entities directly involved in the unlawful occupation of the Palestinian Territories and in severe breaches of international law, including extremist ministers openly calling for acting against the two-state solution;

21.  Urges all Member States to align with the Council Common Position on controls of arms exports and to consistently apply the principles laid down therein; welcomes, in this regard, the recent calls by France and Germany to halt arms exports where there is a clear risk that the exported items will be used to commit war crimes or serious violations of international humanitarian law;

22.  Recalls that the European External Action Service has concluded that the Israeli Government is in clear breach of its human rights obligations under Article 2 of the EU-Israel Association Agreement;

23.  Supports the Commission President’s declaration that EU bilateral support to Israel will be put on hold and that all payments in these areas will stop, without affecting the EU’s work with Israeli civil society or Yad Vashem, and supports her proposal for a partial suspension of the EU-Israel Association Agreement with regard to trade-related matters;

24.  Reiterates its commitment to a negotiated two-state solution on the basis of the 1967 borders, with two sovereign, democratic states living side by side in peace and guaranteed security, and with full respect for international law; insists that the concrete roadmap for implementing the two-state solution must be the central focus of the Commission’s Middle East strategy, which is planned for 2026;

25.  Calls on the Member States, the VP/HR and the President of the European Council to take all possible diplomatic steps to ensure the EU’s commitment to a two-state solution, with concrete political progress towards its realisation, ahead of the UN General Assembly in September 2025 and in line with the New York Declaration on the Peaceful Settlement of the Question of Palestine and the Implementation of the Two-State Solution of 4 August 2025;

26.  Underlines that the total demilitarisation and exclusion of Hamas from any future form of governance in Gaza is a fundamental requirement for a durable and reliable future political and security architecture; calls for the full restoration of a reformed Palestinian Authority as the only governing force in Gaza;

27.  Affirms that the establishment of a Palestinian State represents a key instrument for advancing peace and enhancing the security of the State of Israel; underscores that this is the most effective diplomatic pathway towards regional normalisation and the achievement of lasting peace;

28.  Calls on the Member States to consider recognising the State of Palestine with a view to achieving the two-state solution; repeats, in this regard, the demands of this House that all hostages must be released immediately and that the terrorist organisation Hamas must have no role in the future of Gaza;

29.  Condemns Israel’s retaliatory practices against Member States that have recognised the State of Palestine or announced their intention to do so, noting that these amount to unjustified diplomatic blackmail;

30.  Reiterates that it fully supports the civilian missions that the EU is conducting under the common security and defence policy in the Occupied Palestinian Territories – the European Union Mission for the Support of Palestinian Police and Rule of Law (EUPOL COPPS) in Ramallah and the recently redeployed EU Border Assistance Mission to Rafah – as well as their action in assisting with the reform of the Palestinian Authority’s security and justice sector and integrated border management; recalls that these missions are in a good position to play a broader operational role, on behalf of the EU, in supporting the Palestinian Authority’s state-building and capacity-building efforts; encourages Israel and the Palestinian Authority to maintain full cooperation with both missions;

31.  Condemns the policies of rapidly advancing Israeli settlements and the annexation of the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, which are illegal under international law, and in particular the recent decision to move forward with a settlement plan in the E1 area of the occupied West Bank, which would effectively cut off the occupied West Bank from East Jerusalem and make a two-state solution impossible;

32.  Calls for the EU to use its full leverage to prevent further obstacles to the two-state solution, in particular by stepping up measures against violent settlers in the West Bank and by ensuring that its approach to settlement products fully complies with the EU’s legal order and international obligations; calls, in particular, for current labelling rules for products from Israeli settlements to be enforced strictly and for participation in research programmes (e.g. Horizon Europe grants) to be frozen or withheld;

33.  Expresses concern about the global spillover effects of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, with an increased number of attacks on Israeli citizens and Jews taking place in some Member States, amid an overall rise in antisemitism among specific groups;

34.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the governments and parliaments of the Member States, the Government of Israel, the Palestinian Authority, the Secretary-General of the UN and the League of Arab States.

European Parliament resolution of 11 September 2025 on the situation in Colombia after the wave of recent terrorist attacks (2025/2855(RSP))

P10_TA(2025)0200 RC-B10-0366/2025

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to its previous resolutions on Colombia,

–  having regard to the remarks by the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (VP/HR) Kaja Kallas at the European Parliament plenary session of 17 June 2025, after Colombian Senator Miguel Uribe Turbay was shot from behind during a rally, on the threat to democratic processes and peace in Colombia,

–  having regard to the statement by the Spokesperson of the European External Action Service of 11 August 2025 following the death of Senator Miguel Uribe Turbay in Colombia,

–  having regard to the statement by the Spokesman for UN Secretary-General António Guterres of 11 August 2025,

–  having regard to the statement by the Bureau of the Delegation for relations with the countries of the Andean Community of 12 August 2025, on the recent wave of political violence in Colombia, including the murder of Colombian Senator Miguel Uribe Turbay,

–  having regard to the statements of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) on Colombia and, in particular, the statement of 15 August 2025 entitled ‘IACHR condemns the assassination of Miguel Uribe Turbay in Colombia and calls on the State to guarantee the safety of political leaders’,

–  having regard to the statement by the General Secretariat of the Organization of American States of 11 August 2025 on the passing of Colombian Senator Miguel Uribe Turbay,

–  having regard to Rule 136(2) and (4) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas for decades, and especially now as a result of the current escalation, Colombia has witnessed persistent and shifting dynamics of armed and terrorist violence, while the security situation, public order and humanitarian conditions have steadily deteriorated in rural and urban areas alike, with increased rates of forced displacement, confinement, child recruitment and massacres;

B.  whereas despite the 2016 Peace Agreement, the current escalation of violence and terrorist attacks is alarming and is closely linked to illegal armed groups such as the ELN (National Liberation Army) and the FARC (Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia) dissidents, including the powerful Segunda Marquetalia faction, the Estado Mayor Central faction led by alias Iván Mordisco and the organised crime group Clan del Golfo, which continue to expand their control across Colombia; whereas these groups profit from drug trafficking, extortion, kidnapping, illegal mining and cross-border smuggling, using this revenue to finance terrorism and attacks against the civilian population, and employing increasingly sophisticated methods such as explosive-laden drones; whereas military data show that there were 108 drone attacks in Colombia in 2024, while 118 have been reported so far this year; whereas the drones are used both to drop explosives and to monitor army troops and drug shipment areas;

C.  whereas throughout the year, a series of terrorist attacks has struck both security forces and civilians, including a wave of massacres in January 2025 in the Catatumbo region of the Norte de Santander sparked by clashes between ELN units and dissident FARC factions, which killed at least 80 people, including civilians, and displaced thousands; whereas other more recent attacks in August 2025 included a car bomb in Cali – the third largest city in Colombia – that killed six people and injured more than 60 others, and a terrorist attack in Antioquia, where FARC dissidents of the Estado Mayor Central led by alias Iván Mordisco shot down a helicopter, killing at least 12 police officers who were conducting a coca eradication operation;

D.  whereas on 7 June 2025, Miguel Uribe Turbay, a prominent opposition Senator and pre-presidential candidate of the Centro Democrático Party, was the victim of an assassination attempt during a rally in Bogotá; whereas despite medical efforts, he died from his injuries on 11 August 2025; whereas in the months preceding the attack, Uribe and his legal team had submitted more than 20 formal requests to the National Protection Unit (UNP) for an increase in his security detail, warning of credible threats to his life, with the final request made just two days before the shooting; whereas the UNP repeatedly refused to increase his security, and on the very day of the attack, he only had three agents in his security detail; whereas the masterminds behind, and the motives for, the crime remain unknown;

E.  whereas on 7 September 2025, the Colombian army announced that 72 soldiers had been taken hostage in the Cauca region, an area taken over by guerrilla and narcotrafficking groups; whereas they have since been released;

F.  whereas these events form part of an escalating pattern of coordinated assaults across the country, demonstrating the ability of illegal armed groups to directly threaten Colombia’s institutions and democracy, with the clear intention of creating instability in the run-up to the 2026 elections;

G.  whereas the country’s presidency and other political actors have heightened polarisation through divisive and aggressive discourse; whereas such rhetoric has intensified political polarisation, drawn widespread condemnation and resulted in a violent political climate; whereas a formal criminal complaint has been filed by Senator Uribe’s legal team as a result of Senator Uribe’s democratic credentials being questioned and his family legacy invoked; whereas the president denied these allegations;

H.  whereas drug cartels and transnational crime structures, including the Cártel de los Soles in Venezuela and other illegal groups, support terrorism by sustaining armed groups within and outside Colombia, and supplying arms, financial flows and safe havens across the border, thereby worsening regional instability and undermining Colombia’s sovereignty and democracy;

I.  whereas the Cártel de los Soles, an alleged Venezuelan criminal network led by Nicolás Maduro and other high-ranking military regime officials including Diosdado Cabello, Jorge Rodríguez, Delcy Rodríguez and General Padrino López, among others, has been designated by the US Department of the Treasury as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist group for its role in facilitating narco-terrorism, including the trafficking of cocaine produced by FARC dissidents to the United States and Europe, providing material support and leveraging state institutions to corrupt military and judicial functions;

J.  whereas according to the latest UN data, cocaine production in Colombia has reached record levels, with ripple effects across Latin America, the United States and Europe;

K.  whereas some armed groups operating in Colombia, such as the ELN, are already designated on the EU’s list of terrorist organisations; whereas, although the FARC was removed from that list following the 2016 Peace Agreement, the evolution of the security context has led to the emergence of new violent actors, which, under the criteria established by EU law, clearly qualify as terrorist organisations; whereas this notably includes the FARC’s dissident factions, especially the Estado Mayor Central, which have carried out systematic attacks against civilians and security forces, as well as transnational criminal structures such as the Clan del Golfo and the Cártel de los Soles, which facilitate terrorist activities and provide shelter and safe havens across borders;

L.  whereas after the ‘total peace strategy’, there has been a paradoxical increase in the activity of these illegal groups and in organised crime gaining territory and power in areas with historically limited state presence; whereas the Colombian authorities have been trying to improve security operations with the aim of fighting illegal dissident factions;

M.  whereas illegal armed groups, including guerrillas, dissidents and groups descended from paramilitaries, continuously violate international humanitarian law and are directly linked to the increase in the widespread violence and impunity in Colombia, which affects political parties, human rights defenders, journalists and social leaders, among others; whereas the current wave of violence is affecting more people across a wider and growing range of locations than in previous phases of the armed conflict;

N.  whereas the Colombian Ombudsperson’s Office (Defensoría del Pueblo) confirmed that a total of 81 human rights defenders and social leaders were killed nationwide in the first five months of 2025; whereas Global Witness and Front Line Defenders have reported that Colombia is the most dangerous country in the world for human rights defenders and that of the 324 human rights defenders killed worldwide between January 2024 and September 2025, 157 were killed in Colombia; whereas the presidency intends to propose a budget cut to the Colombian Ombudsperson’s Office, which has documented over 1 500 killings of human rights defenders and other individuals since its establishment in 1992; whereas this will have a direct impact on the protection of human rights in the country as violence increases and critical elections approach;

O.  whereas during the first half of 2025, 1,45 million people were affected by violence in Colombia – four times as many as during the same period in 2024 – and over 70 200 people were forcibly displaced, 30 % more than in the whole of 2024; whereas reports indicate increased child recruitment and the use of anti-personnel mines;

P.  whereas, in 2025, the Indepaz Observatory documented 52 massacres, with a total of 172 victims, and the Colombian Ombudsperson’s Office identified at least 11 critical humanitarian emergency hotspots arising from the increase in armed violence driven by the internal fragmentation and expansion of at least 10 illegal armed groups, which are now present in over 73 % of the country (809 municipalities); whereas according to a military intelligence report cited by one of the nation’s leading newspapers, El Tiempo, in the first half of 2025, illegal groups grew in size by more than 1 000 members, reaching a total of nearly 22 000 nationwide; whereas these groups may now be present in 562 municipalities across 29 of Colombia’s 32 departments;

Q.  whereas the EU and Parliament have been very supportive of the 2016 Peace Process in Colombia; whereas the EU has reaffirmed its political and financial commitment to the Colombian Peace Process, and continues to monitor its implementation; whereas the Colombian people rejected the proposal in a referendum;

R.  whereas a strong and democratic Colombia is vital for regional stability and security in Latin America;

1.  Condemns, in the strongest possible terms, the assassination of Colombian Senator and pre-presidential candidate Miguel Uribe Turbay and expresses its condolences to his family and loved ones;

2.  Stresses that Uribe’s assassination is not an isolated tragedy, but part of a wider climate of political intimidation and violence in Colombia; reiterates its support for all Colombians who reject violence and demand a future free from corruption and criminal collusion;

3.  Further condemns and deplores the recent wave of terrorist attacks, and the killings of, and general escalation in violence against, political actors, public figures, human rights defenders, journalists, social leaders and security forces, which have rocked Colombia and had a highly damaging effect on the country’s social cohesion and stability;

4.  Expresses its condolences to the families of the numerous victims, many of whom were members of the security forces, and to the people of Colombia;

5.  Calls on the authorities to investigate these terrorist attacks, including the assassination of Miguel Uribe Turbay, to the fullest extent possible so that the perpetrators can be brought to justice; highlights that in order to bring the perpetrators to justice, the authorities must investigate not only the individuals who carried out the acts, but also the instigators and facilitators behind them;

6.  Urges the Colombian authorities to identify the motives and all factors behind the worrying escalation of violence and the terrorist attacks, continue to address the underlying causes of the conflict, ensure the full protection of human rights throughout Colombia, and build a culture of peace and dialogue for conflict resolution;

7.  Notes, with grave concern, the proliferation and consolidation of organised crime and indiscriminate terrorist group activities in Colombia’s regions bordering Venezuela; stresses that these territories have become corridors for drug trafficking, arms smuggling and money laundering facilitated by transnational structures such as the Cártel de los Soles, and that the United States has charged and sanctioned the highest-ranking Venezuelan regime officials as a result of their documented complicity; underlines that this cross-border nexus not only fuels terrorism and strengthens Colombian insurgent and dissident groups, but also poses a direct threat to regional stability, democratic governance and Colombia’s sovereignty; urges the Colombian authorities to investigate cartel financing and prosecute collaborators within Colombia, in particular by following and disrupting the transnational financial flows used by cartels that move through banks, gold mining and front companies, modernise surveillance and intensify counter-drug operations, and enhance regional cooperation and shared intelligence mechanisms;

8.  Welcomes the EU Member States’ concrete contributions in this regard, such as the Italian ‘Falcone-Borsellino’ initiative, which is designed to help countries in Latin America and the Caribbean combat transnational organised crime, providing technical support and assistance, training and good practices in the fields of justice and security;

9.  Considers that inflammatory statements spread by the presidency and other political actors have contributed to increased polarisation, political violence, hate speech and instability in the country; calls on the Colombian authorities, political leaders and civil society in general to do their utmost to prevent the escalation of the violence, by increasing security measures and refraining from exacerbating the polarisation in the country through inflammatory statements; reminds the Colombian authorities of the urgent need to protect political actors, public figures, human rights defenders, journalists and all citizens exercising their democratic rights, and calls for immediate measures to be taken to strengthen their protection;

10.  Expresses concern over the documented rise in political violence against candidates and leaders in 2025, which may risk undermining electoral guarantees and public trust in governing institutions; calls for transparent communication from institutions, adequate resourcing of the electoral authorities, and robust security measures to ensure that the upcoming 2026 elections are conducted in a free and safe manner;

11.  Expresses its concern at the persistence of impunity and obstacles to accessing justice in cases of serious human rights violations and abuses; stresses that fighting impunity is key to preventing a recurrence of criminal acts and terrorist attacks, and to guaranteeing the full exercise of political rights;

12.  Calls for the presence of the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights to be strengthened in Colombia and for the mandate of the UN Verification Mission in Colombia to continue;

13.  Calls on the Council and the VP/HR to update the EU’s list of terrorist organisations so as to reflect the current realities in Colombia and the wider region; urges the Council to include – alongside existing listings such as the ELN – in particular the Clan del Golfo, the FARC dissident factions, notably the Segunda Marquetalia and Estado Mayor Central, and the Cártel de los Soles, an organisation that provides support, shelter and logistics to Colombia’s armed terrorist groups; stresses that recognising these actors as terrorist organisations under EU law is essential to strengthen international cooperation, cut their financial networks, and enhance support for Colombia’s institutions and democracy and the protection of civilian populations;

14.  Acknowledges the positive impact of the now-concluded European Trust Fund for Peace in Colombia and calls for the VP/HR, the Commission and the Member States to reaffirm and reinforce the EU’s political, financial and technical support for the Colombian peace process, reflecting this in the forthcoming multiannual financial framework, continued high-level political engagement, and the ongoing work of the EU Special Envoy for the Peace Process in Colombia;

15.  Expresses its concern over the budget cut proposed to the Colombian Ombudsperson’s Office and reiterates that funding is crucial to protect human rights; calls for the EU, particularly the European External Action Service and its delegation in Colombia, to actively support respect for international humanitarian law and the government’s obligation to protect civilian populations;

16.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the governments and parliaments of the Member States, the President, Government and Parliament of Colombia, the United Nations, and the Organization of American States.