What changed

1. Grants the Secretary-General of the Court of Auditors discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the of the Court of Auditors for the financial year 2024 / Postpones its decision on granting the Secretary-General of the Court of Auditors discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the Court of Auditors for the financial year 2024;

1. Notes that the budget of the Court falls under MFF heading 7, ‘European public administration’, which amounted to EUR 13,3 billion in 20232024 (representing 6,9 % of the total Union budget); notes that the Court’s budget of approximately EUR 0,2 billion represents approximately 1,5 % of the total administrative expenditure of the Union;

6. Notes the announcement by the Court of 1 October 2025 on the introduction of a revised audit approach for Joint Undertakings starting with the 2025 financial year; notes that this change was prompted, inter alia, by staff capacity constraints and by the cessation of audits of Joint Undertakings under Horizon Europe by the Commission’s Internal Audit Service, which had previously audited Joint Undertakings, thereby limiting the availability of complementary audit assurance; notes further that the new approach foresees an adequate audit sample size, the consolidation of audit work across all Joint Undertakings and the issuance of two separate statements of assurance, supported by additional thematic and special reports; calls on the Court to ensure that the revised methodology is implemented in a timely manner and that it continues to meet the highest standards of audit quality, reliability and assurance for the protection of the Union’s financial interests;

7.8. Notes that the implementation rates for commitments and payments for 2024 remained high, almost the same as in 2023, whereas the utilisation rate for appropriations stood at 97,30 % and payments represented 94,81 % of total commitments in 2024; notes an increase in the cancelled appropriations at year-end from approximately EUR 3,4 million in 2023 to EUR 4,4 million in 2024; commends the Court for having maintained below 11 days the average time for payment of invoices in 2024; encourages the Court to maintain strict cost discipline, continue prioritising operational efficiency, and further reduce year-end cancellations, thereby improving efficiency and the value-for-money of its appropriations;

9.10. Notes that, according to the Questionnaire, the impact of the illegal Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine was felt by the Court through inflation-driven increases in the cost of goods, services and logistics in 2024; welcomes the Court’s measures to counter such effects by conducing more detailed pre-market analyses to ensure realistic planning and effective procurement; notes further with satisfaction that the Court’s costs for energy consumption (Budget Item No. 2024) fell significantly, from EUR 1 556 671 in 2023 to EUR 887 827 in 2024, mainly because of a reduction in the fixed electricity price, in line with the interinstitutional contract with the provider concerned; acknowledges the need for all Union institutions to improve their budget management, including by taking into account price volatility, especially in the energy sector, when concluding contracts with service providers;

16.17. Notes that, during 2024, the Court presented 2 annual reports, 3 specific annual reports, 28 special reports, 4 reviews and 3 opinions, totalling 40 items (down from 45 items in 2023); welcomes the Court’s focus, through special reports and reviews, in 2024 on pressing challenges that the Union is facing on key topics such as financial instruments in cohesion policy, transparency of Union funding granted to NGOs, Union bodies fighting fraud, security of gas supply, investment in artificial intelligence (AI), climate adaptation, absorption of the Recovery and Resilience Facility (the ‘RFF’), the road to zero-emission cards, support for refugees in Türkiye and the Union’s industrial policy on hydrogen; welcomes further the Court’s planned reports on the RRF in areas such as transparency and traceability, as well as on the Union’s architecture and strategy in the fight against fraud and the Union’s support to Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia; notes an improvement with regard to stakeholders’ satisfaction with the Court’s work, with a survey carried out in 2024 showing that 89 % of respondents (up from 85%85 % in 2023) considered the Court’s reports useful and that 82 % (up from 78 %) considered the Court’s work to have an impact;

17. Notes that the Court has a set of key performance indicators (KPIs) to measure progress made towards achieving its strategic goals, in line with the Court’s 2021-2025 strategy; notes the Court’s strategic goals for 2024: improvement of accountability, transparency and audit arrangements, targeting of areas and topics where audits can add most value and the provision of strong audit assurance in a challenging and changing environment; invites the Court to present its KPIs, the degree of progress achieved and targets in a summarised way in the future (table format);

18. Calls on the Court to provide more detailed and systematic assessments of the spillover effects of Union-funded programmes on Member States, both those with high and those with low absorption rates of Union funds; stresses that a comprehensive analysis of the economic, social, administrative and territorial impacts of such spillover effects, including cross-border and distributional effects, would strengthen the evaluation of the long-term impact, added value and sustainability of Union spending and support better-informed policy-making at both Union and national level;

19. Notes that the Court has a set of key performance indicators (KPIs) to measure progress made towards achieving its strategic goals, in line with the Court’s 2021-2025 strategy; notes the Court’s strategic goals for 2024: improvement of accountability, transparency and audit arrangements, targeting of areas and topics where audits can add most value and the provision of strong audit assurance in a challenging and changing environment; invites the Court to present its KPIs, the degree of progress achieved and targets in a summarised way in the future (table format); calls on the Court to further develop KPI based on the performance and results of European policies in order to clearly measure the impact of the policies pursued by the Commission;

20. Invites the Court to consolidate its findings into a comparative performance analysis and to develop a methodology for a "performance compass" of Union programmes; believes that such an instrument, while respecting the diversity of policies, would provide the discharge authority, decision-makers and the general public with clear guidance on which programmes use resources effectively and which might be candidates for termination or fundamental restructuring;

19.22. Notes fromthat, according to the Follow-up Report thatReport, the Commission has agreed to provide the Court with a manual extraction of data from the ARACHNE tool; deplores, nevertheless, the fact that the Court’s access to FENIX, the reporting tool on the RRF, remains an open issue, with the Commission granting the Court withpartial access to only some of the FENIX modules;modules, and the information contained therein not being updated in a timely manner; welcomes a reported increase in the number of the Court’s users who have access to FENIX; supports, nevertheless, the Court’s request to the Commission to grant itthe Court full access as soon as possible; recalls that the Commission’s Directorate-General for Economic and Financial Affairs has endeavoured to grant the Court access to FENIX files within 2 weeks of approving a payment request; is alarmed, however, that in practice this deadline is not being met in many cases, and delays of up to 2,5 months have been encountered in some instances, significantly slowing down the delivery of Court findings;findings or undermining the effectiveness and timeliness of the Court’s audit work, in particular on high-risk expenditure such as the RFF; reminds in this context the Commission of its obligation under Article 263 of the Financial Regulation to grant the Court comprehensive access to all relevant systems and databases (ARACHNE, FENIX,FENIX and ARES, among others); calls therefore on the Commission to remedy this situation without delay, including by concluding an interinstitutional arrangement ensuring the Court’s full, systematic and real-time access to all relevant databases, including ARACHNE and FENIX; invites the Court to report back to the discharge authority on concrete improvements achieved;

22.25. Notes that, according to the Questionnaire, the Court employed 64 trainees, 59 of whom received a monthly allowance in 2024; welcomes the Court’s new programme, entitled TraineEca Career Development, which aims to offer job opportunities to the most deserving trainees; notes, in addition, the Court’s plan to offer special traineeships in the area of AI to recent university graduates and doctoral students in that area; renews its emphasis that traineeships should be remunerated in compliance with Parliament’s resolution of 15 June 2023 on Quality Traineeships in the Union (2020/2005(INL)), which calls for all internships in the Union to be paid; emphasises that unpaid traineeships constitute a form of exploitation of young workers and a barrier to equal opportunities;

23.26. Notes that, according to the Questionnaire, recruiting officials continued to be a challenge for the Court in 2024, due to a lack of attractiveness of Luxembourg as a place of work or the lack of interest in audit and control jobs among young workers; notes with satisfaction that the Court addressed this issue by organising regular selection procedures that target the Court’s trainees, organising internal competitions to retain the most deserving talent and increasing outreach activities; encourages the Court to continue these efforts, in order to safeguard the continuity of its activity; acknowledges, in this context, that a competition clause is needed with a view to also organising EPSO competitions exclusively for Luxembourg; commends the Court for having joined an interinstitutional agreement whereby staff recruited by Luxembourg-based Union institutions receive a housing allowance as of 2025 in order to compensate for the high cost of living in Luxembourg;

24.27. Is aware that the Court has no role in the selection process for members under Article 286(2) TFEU; recalls, nevertheless, that there is still ana importantsignificant gender imbalance among the members of the Court, with only 10 women among the 27 members; regrets the fact that several Member States have never nominated a woman to the Court; reiterates its call on Member States to proposetake candidatesthe ofneed differentfor genders,gender balance into account when proposing candidates, aiming for a more balanced and representative composition of the Court;Court, while ensuring that nominations continue to be based on merit, qualification and independence criteria;

29.32. Recalls that, at the end of 2023, all 29 additional posts (temporary agents) required for the RRF audit of EUR 723,8 billion were filled; understands, however, that the materiality, complexity and large amounts of, and rapid disbursements from, the RRF continue to pose challenges and that current resources are not sufficient to systematically ensure that RRF expenditure complies with Union and national rules and to respond to the increased Union activities; commends, nevertheless, the efforts made by the Court to carry out its duties regarding the RRF so far despite the inadequacy of the resources available; supports, in this context, the Court’s request to convert the 29 temporary agents hired for RRF-related audits into permanent posts; highlights the importance of ensuring that the Court is consistently provided with adequate staffing levels and structurally equipped to fulfil both its mandate and additional responsibilities stemming from future performance-based financing instruments, including the Multiannual Financial Framework;

33. Notes with appreciation that also in 2024 the Court exceeded the professional training target of 5 days of non-language training per year for auditors, in line with the International Federation of Accountants’ recommendations, and 2 days for non-audit staff (respectively 5,8 and 3,9);

31.35. Notes that 13 cases of burnout were reported in 2024, up from 7 cases in 2023; notes with concern the significant increase in reported burnout cases in 2024; calls on the Court to carry out a thorough analysis of the reasons for this significant increase, including on workload distribution, organisational drivers and structural risks, and to integrate the evidence-based findings into its human-resources planning and management practices, with a view to effectively preventing burnout and improving the working environment; welcomes the fact that the Court took several steps to reduce the risk of burnout by introducing a full wellbeing programme, offering resilience training, publishing and implementing guidelines on returning to work after long-term sick leave, continuing to offer mental health first aid, and providing financial support to staff by covering the cost of 10 sessions with a psychologist of their choice; notes, in particular, that the Court organised 4 compulsory training sessions for managers in 2024, focusing on staff wellbeing, performance, work-life balance and preventing burnout;

35. Reiterates its39. deepNotes concernwith regardingconcerns the Court’s refusal to lift the immunity of its former President and the Court’s decision to deny the request of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) to allow a number of the Court’s staff members to testify in an ongoing criminal investigation; notesnotes, frombased on the Follow-up Report the Court’sReport, positionthat wherebythe itCourt did not lift said immunity because the EPPO did not provide the Court with “sufficient information enabling it to understand which actions the persons concerned are accused of and in how far such actions might constitute criminal conduct”, citingand that the Court relied on case-law as part of the applicable legal framework in support of the Court’sthat position; notes that, on 10 February 2025, the EPPO filed an appeal (case number T-99/25) with the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) under Article 263, paragraph 4, of the263(4) TFEU against the Court’s decision to deny the EPPO’s request to allow a number of the Court’s staff members to testify in an ongoing criminal investigation; notes further that the aforementioned appeal did not challenge the non-lifting of the immunity of the persons concerned; stresses that the powers of the Union institutionsinstitutions’ toduty withholdof authorisationsincere ofcooperation theirrequires staffthat membersauthorisations to behear heardstaff as witness do not include havingwitnesses ain saycriminal oninvestigations thebe meritsrefused ofonly thein legalstrictly proceedingsexceptional incircumstances; whichurges the staff members areCourt to testify and can onlyclarify bethe invokedcriteria inapplied situationswhen wheredeciding theon interestsrequests offrom the Union, whichEPPO mustand beto ofensure considerablethat importancesuch anddecisions vitalcannot tobe theperceived Union,as wouldobstructing bejudicial atinvestigations; risk;calls urgeson the Court to maintain a high level of transparency and accountability in its cooperation with the EPPO and other Union bodies responsible for combating fraud and misconduct;misconduct and to ensure that immunity is not invoked to hinder legitimate judicial proceedings;

42.46. Recalls the fact that the Internal Audit Service of the Court (IAS) carried out an audit on the ethical framework applicable to the Court’s staff and members; notes that, according to the Final Report (02/2023) sent by the Court to Parliament’s President on 9 July 2024 and according to the Questionnaire, the IAS issued 16 recommendations, 15 of which have already been completed, with one, concerning conflicts of interest of staff, ongoing; urges the Court to complete the outstanding recommendation without delay and invites it to keep the discharge authority duly informed of the progress made in this regard;

43.47. Notes that, according to the Court’s report, no cases of corruption or fraud in the Court’s internal operations were identified in 2024; appreciates the Court for organising preventive training on anti-corruption policies and procedures, 10 sessions of which were held in 2024 with 257 people attending in total; appreciates the fact that, according to the Follow-up Report, the Court issued in 2024 a single consolidated document on addressing fraudfraud-related matters in the context of its audit activities, that provides comprehensive and detailed guidance to the Court’s auditors, thus harmonising how the Court’s audit chambers address fraud-relatedcases mattersof suspected fraud, corruption or any other illegal activity affecting the financial interests of the Union uncovered during external audit work;work, and contributing to ensuring consistency; notes that the fraud risk in connection with the Court’s internal operations is managed through the Court’s internal control framework designed to prevent, detect, correct and follow-up on any irregularities involving Court members or staff that might affect the Union’s financial interests; notes further the Court’s view that designing a standalone antifraud strategy for internal operations “would entail disproportionate administrative burden, given the extensive controls already in place”, but continues to ask the Court to adopt an anti-fraud strategy covering all types of operations;

44.48. Notes the Court’s view, as expressed in the Follow-up Report, that its role as an independent external audit institution places it outside the typical scope of entities seeking to interact with and lobby Union decision-making bodies; is of the opinion that this argument does not fully apply because the Court issues special reports in which the Court examines whether the objectives of Union policies and programmes have been met, which gives the Court’s work either a political or advisory dimension, even if the Court is not a decision-making body; recalls, in addition, that there are other non-decision-making and advisory bodies of the Union that have formally joined the Union’s Transparency Register; reiterates, therefore,reiterates its call on the Court to join the Transparency Register,Register whichwithout woulddelay, adherein toline basicwith principlesthe practices of transparencyother withoutnon-decision-making creatingUnion anybodies, obstaclesin order to thereinforce fullpublic trust while fully preserving its independence ofas the Court;Union’s external auditor;

46.50. Strongly supports the Court’s efforts to develop an audit knowledge ecosystem through digitalisation; notes, in this context, that, according to the Questionnaire, in 2024 the Court implemented several initiatives to enhance its digital capabilities and operational efficiency, including the integration of audit information systems, the increasing of the interoperability between systems and applications, the introduction of the Document Reading Assistant (DORA) to support knowledge management in audit activities, the launch of the BibliotECA Discovery Collections Service and the adoption of a new digital archiving policy; emphasises that pairing digitalisation with an increased number of on-site visits should lead to more efficient and accurate audit outcomes; encourages further investments in AI-assisted audit tools and interoperability of systems to enhance audit precision, reduce administrative burden, and maximise value-for-money;

47.51. Appreciates the publication of the Court’s Artificial Intelligence initial strategy and deployment roadmap for 2024-2025; notes with satisfaction that, according to the Questionnaire, the Court made steady progress in implementing that strategy, focusing, inter alia, on testing and preparing for the rollout of tools such as Microsoft Copilot and GPT@EC, raising staff awareness with targeted AI training, as well as testing AI applications in audit work and sharing preliminary findings; welcomes furthermore the strengthening of the Court’s AI governance, with the Court setting up the AI Advisory Committee and appointing an AI correspondent in 2024; notes with satisfaction that the AI Advisory Committee, whose role is to support and advise the Court in fulfilling its obligations stemming from the legal and ethical framework governing the use of AI, is composed of staff with a mix of expertise to ensure a comprehensive approach and understanding of the impact of AI; calls on the Court, as part of its AI strategy, to develop clear indicators to assess the added value, risks and limitations of AI-supported audit tools, and to report regularly to Parliament on their impact on audit quality, transparency and accountability; stresses that AI must be used in compliance with strict principles of ethical use, transparency, data protection, human oversight, and protection against algorithmic bias or misuse;

68. Underlines the important role of the Court in the Union’s Anti-fraud Architecture (AFA); notes that the Court’s audits and special reports systematically identify weaknesses, irregularities and risks, thereby triggering corrective and recovery actions by the Commission, Member States and other AFA actors; notes that, through this oversight function, the Court not only enhances transparency and accountability but also strengthens the overall deterrence and detection capacity of the EU system, ensuring that public funds are managed soundly and protected against fraud and misuse;

76. Welcomes the Court’s Special report 11/2025: Transparency of Union funding granted to NGOs; notes with concern the problems identified therein, including shortcomings in transparency, classification and oversight; underlines the need for the Court to continue and strengthen its monitoring and reporting on these issues to ensure full compliance with financial rules, transparency requirements and the Union’s fundamental values;

77. Encourages the Court, in this context, to prepare a special report on Union funding provided to NGOs active in the Gaza context and to organisations involved in the development of Palestinian school textbooks; underlines that such scrutiny is crucial to ensure that Union funds are not diverted, directly or indirectly, to terrorist organisations or their affiliates, nor used in a manner that promotes hatred, radicalisation, or incitement to violence, and to ensure full compliance with Union financial rules, transparency standards, and the Union’s core values;