What changed

C. whereas in 2024, Parliament received 1 518 petitions, which represents an increase of 4.3 % compared to the 1 452 petitions it received in 2023 and of 19.8 % compared to the 1 217 petitions it received in 2022; whereas the total amount of petitions received continues to be sensibly lower than the peaks reached in 2013 and 2014, where the Parliament received 2 891 and 2 715 petitions respectively;

E. whereas the overall number of petitions remains modest in relation to the total population of the EU, revealing that efforts still need to be stepped up to increase citizens’ awareness of their right to petition and the possible usefulness of petitions as a means of drawing the attention of the EU institutions and the Member States to matters that affect and concern citizens directly; whereas the Committee on Petitions, which is very popular among young people at events such as the European Youth Event (EYE) in Strasbourg, is an effective means of promoting this right and of raising awareness of its importance among citizens, particularly among younger people; whereas it is therefore essential to ensure an active and systematic presence of the Committee on Petitions in every edition of the EYE in order to enhance its visibility and accessibility; whereas in exercising the right to petition, citizens expect the EU institutions to provide added value in finding a solution to their problems; whereas this right to petition must also promote fundamental principles such as the good administration of the European institutions, freedom of expression and respect for democratic expression;

F. whereas the criteria for the admissibility of petitions are laid down in Article 227 TFEU and Rule 232(1) of Parliament’s Rules of Procedure, which require that petitions must be submitted by an EU citizen or by a natural or legal personperson, either individually or in association with others, who is a resident of or has a registered office in a Member State and is directly affectedState, byon matters fallingwhich fall within the EU’s fields of activity;activity and which affect the petitioners directly, with the latter condition having a very broad interpretation;

H. whereas the right to petition Parliament is a fundamental right of EU citizens, offering both citizens and residents an open, democratic and transparent mechanism to address their elected representatives directly; whereas many persons with disabilities lack equal access to information and communication due to the limited availability of accessible formats and due to the fact that national sign languages are not recognised as part of the EU’s multilingualism; whereas this essential tool empowers citizens to actively and effectively participate in the life of the Union; whereas through petitions, EU citizens can complain about failures to implement EU law and help detect breaches of EU law;law, in accordance with the sovereignty of the Member States and the application of the EU Treaties;

I. whereas Parliament has long been at the forefront of the development of the petitions process internationally and has the most open and transparent petitions process in Europe, allowing petitioners to participate fully in its activities; whereas the online petitions platform could be made more intuitive so that it would be easier for users to navigate; whereas incorporating AI could simplify research and improve the accessibility of petitions by offering more advanced functionalities than the current format;

J. whereas the activities of the Committee on Petitions are based on the input of petitioners and the information they provide; whereas this information along with the expertise delivered by the Commission, the Member States and other bodies is essential for the work of the Committee on Petitions; whereas admissible petitions often provide input that is valuable to the work of the other parliamentary committees; whereas petitions can therefore also play a role in the legislative process, providing concrete feedback on the impact of EU policies and enabling policies to address emerging needs;

J. whereas the Committee on Petitions underlines the importance of increased transparency in the handling of petitions, including systematic feedback to petitioners at key stages of the procedure and a clear timeline for follow-up actions by EU institutions;

L. whereas each petition is considered and examined carefully, efficiently and transparently; whereas all petitioners have the right to receive a reply informing them about the decision on admissibility and follow-up actions taken by the committee within a reasonable period of time and in their own language or in the language used in the petition;

L. whereas the right to petition enhances Parliament’s responsiveness to complaints and concerns relating to respect for EU fundamental rights and compliance with Union law in the Member States; whereas petitions could be a useful source of information on instances of misapplication or breaches of EU law and enable Parliament and other institutions to assess the transposition and application of EU law and its impact on the rights of EU citizens and residents;

M. whereas each petition is considered and examined carefully, efficiently and transparently; whereas all petitioners have the right to receive a reply informing them about the decision on admissibility and follow-up actions taken by the committee within a reasonable period of time and in their own language or in the language used in the petition; whereas petition 1056/2016 discussed on 19 March 2024 is requesting that Parliament allow for the tabling of petitions in national sign languages used in the EU;

N.O. whereas the main subjects of concern raised in petitions submitted in 2024 related to the environment, fundamental rights, the rule of law (including the right to good administration, the right to access documents, and freedom of expression and information), the internal market, justice, consumer rights and health;

R.S. whereas no fact-finding visits took place in 2024 for petitions for which an inquiry was ongoing, owing to the European election recess period; whereas the committeeCommittee carried out the follow-up assessment and adopted two reports on previous fact-finding visitvisits whichthat took place in 2023; whereas a number oftwo fact-finding visits were scheduled for the first half of 2025;

1. Recalls the Committee on Petitions’ important role in protecting and promoting the rights of EU citizens and residentsresidents, byand ensuringstresses that it must ensure that petitioners’ concerns and complaints are examined in a timely, effectiveeffective, accessible and appropriate mannermanner, and that petitioners are duly informed about the actions taken and the progress made on their petitions; regrets, however, that this is not always the case in practice; recalls that all petitions aremust be treated through an open, democratic and transparent petition process;process, which the Committee is expected to uphold consistently; recommends revising internal procedures to ensure that similar or repeated petitions are grouped together and handled more efficiently, while safeguarding the right of each petitioner to be heard individually;

2. Reiterates the importance of a continuous public debate on the EU’s fields of activity in order to ensure that citizens are properly informed about the scope of the Union’s competences and the different levels of decision-making in order to reduce the number of inadmissible petitions; reiterates its call,call for broader awareness-raising campaigns, especially in thisremote regard,regions, foras broaderwell awareness-raisingas campaignsamong under-represented groups of citizens, including young people, women, and rural and insular communities, through the active involvement of the existing EU communication services across the Union to help increase citizens’ knowledge about their right to petition, as well as the scope of the EU’s responsibilities and the competences of the Committee on Petitions; calls for clearer, jargon-free communication to petitioners and better public explanation of the role and limits of the Committee on Petitions, particularly for vulnerable or first-time users;

3. Recalls the European dimension of the Committee on Petitions, which can be addressed by citizens from all 27 Member States on issues that fall within the scope of the EU Treaties and EU law; believes that the CommitteeCommittee, respecting sovereignty and national specificities, has a special responsibility to uphold this European dimension and to demonstrate the added value of European unity and integration to citizens;

4. Points out that petitions constitute a unique opportunity for Parliament and the other EU institutions to directly connect with EU citizens and maintain a regular dialogue with them, particularly in cases where they are affected by the misapplication or breach of EU law; stresses the need for enhanced cooperation between the EU institutions and national, regional and local authorities on inquiries regarding the implementation of, and compliance with, EU law; believes that such cooperation is crucial to address and resolve citizens’ concerns over the application of EU law and that it contributes to strengthening the democratic legitimacy and accountability of the Union; calls, therefore, for the meaningful participation of Member States’ representatives in committee meetings and for timely and detailed responses to requests for clarification or information sent by the Committee on Petitions to national authorities;authorities so as to ensure proper follow-up of petitions;

5. Recalls that the Committee on Petitions received a significant number of petitions in early 2024 expressing concern over perceived threats to the rule of law in Spain; takes note of the joint debate held in January 2024 on several petitions addressing developments in Spain, particularly in relation to the government’s proposal for an amnesty law and its potential implications for the Spanish and EU legal frameworks;

6.7. Welcomes the creation of a new Commission webpageweb page on infringement cases, the transposition of directives and the EU Pilot dialogue; reiterates, however, its call on the Commission to regularly update the Committee on Petitions on developments in infringement proceedings and to ensure that the Committee on Petitions gets access to the relevant information on infringement proceedings and EU Pilot procedures that relate to open petitions; reiterates the need to improve the transparency of infringement procedures as well as communication with petitioners on the state of play of such procedures and stresses that this would benefit the petition process; welcomes the Commission’s initiative to include petitions in the Commission’s public register of infringement decisions portal,decisions, as well as the inclusion of a link to the Commission’s public register in the Petitions Portal; welcomes Commissioner Šefčovič’s commitment to further interlink the Commission’s public register and Parliament’s petitions portal; reiterates its call toon the Commission to include all these requirements in the Framework Agreement on relations between the European Parliament and the European Commission;

7. Considers that more active cooperation between the Member States and the Committee on Petitions is needed to unblock those petitions requiring prompt responses and reactions from the national authorities;

8. Calls for an independent and periodic evaluation of the quality and clarity of Commission responses to petitions, particularly focusing on readability, relevance and sensitivity to petitioners’ contexts in order to ensure that citizens receive meaningful and respectful engagement;

8. Recalls that the e-Petition database is an essential internal tool that allows the members of the Committee on Petitions to access all necessary information in order to follow up on the state of play of each petition and to be able to make informed decisions on the treatment of the petitions; notes that the e-Petition database also plays an important role in communication with petitioners;

9. Considers that more active cooperation between the Member States and the Committee on Petitions could be useful in unblocking petitions requiring prompt responses and reactions from the national authorities;

9. Recalls the Commission’s commitment to create an interinstitutional IT tool between the Commission and Parliament aiming to share information and documents on all follow-up actions taken on petitions, such as infringement procedures, legislative proposals or replies by national authorities, thus enhancing the transparency and efficiency of the treatment of petitions, which, in a wider context, would contribute to increasing citizens’ trust in the EU institutions and the European project;

10. Recalls that the e-Petition database is an essential internal tool that allows the members of the Committee on Petitions to access all necessary information in order to follow up on the state of play of each petition and to be able to make informed decisions on the treatment of the petitions; notes that the e-Petition database also plays an important role in communication with petitioners; highlights the need to further modernise the Committee on Petitions’ digital tools and suggests that a responsible and human-guided use of artificial intelligence be explored to further improve the treatment of petitions;

11. Recalls the Commission’s commitment to create an interinstitutional IT tool between the Commission and Parliament, aiming to share information and documents on all follow-up actions taken on petitions, such as infringement procedures, legislative proposals or replies by national authorities, thus enhancing the transparency and efficiency of the treatment of petitions, which, in a wider context, would contribute to increasing citizens’ trust in the EU institutions and the European project; calls for the swift deployment of such an interinstitutional IT tool;

12.14. Takes note that the environment remained the main area of concern for petitioners in 2024, with more than 20 % of petitions raising environmental issues; notes the significant number of petitions denouncing violations of EU environmental legislation in several Member States; notes that issues reported by petitioners and discussed in committee include wolf protection in the EU, the long-term toxic effects of pesticides and the breach of the Industrial Emissions Directive arising from the management of a steel plant; stresses the importance of delivering on EU citizens’ expectations regarding the protection of the environment and urges the Commission, together with the Member States, to ensure the correct implementation of EU legislation in the environmental field;

13. Stresses the important contribution made by the Committee on Petitions to the protection of the rights of persons with disabilities, as revealed by its treatment of a number of petitions on this topic, including consideration of Petition 1056/2016 on the submission of petitions in national sign languages; recalls the annual workshop of 2 December 2024 on the rights of persons with disabilities held by the Committee on Petitions, focussing on the state of play of the strategy for the rights of persons with disabilities 2021-2030;

15. Takes note that other subject matters were dealt with by the Committee on Petitions, such as the protection of children’s rights, including online safety, and the improvement of animal welfare; draws attention to petitions highlighting violations of passengers’ rights; notes, also, that numerous petitions raised concerns about data protection and, in particular, the enforcement of the General Data Protection Regulation; highlights also the number of petitions addressing the housing crisis across Member States; notes that the Committee on Petitions dealt with the responsibilities of fossil fuel companies in the cost of living crisis, with concerns relating to rail safety, and with the protection of workers’ rights; notes the consideration of petitions on culture and national heritage; recalls that the Committee on Petitions discussed several petitions on the cancellation of permanent residence permits of Russian citizens; notes that the Committee on Petitions received a substantial number of petitions on the rule of law in Member States, which were debated in committee; notes the petitions submitted on the conditions of reception of immigrants and asylum seekers in the Member States and notes the petitions reporting cases of discrimination; expects a due follow-up and updated information from the Commission on all these petitions;

14. Underlines the specific protection role played by the Committee on Petitions within the EU in the framework of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities; points to the committee’s important ongoing work in connection with petitions concerning issues related to disabilities;

16. Stresses the important contribution made by the Committee on Petitions to the protection of the rights of persons with disabilities, as revealed by its treatment of a number of petitions on this topic, including consideration of petition 1056/2016 on the submission of petitions in national sign languages; acknowledges, in this context, the efforts of Parliament’s services and notes that not just the best technical, but the most accessible solution for deaf citizens must be found in order to communicate with them in their own mother tongue – in national sign languages; requests the modification of the Rules of Procedure in close cooperation with the Committee on Constitutional Affairs in order to eliminate the mandatory exclusively written communication with citizens who are sign language users, deaf or hard of hearing so that, upon their request, they can use sign language during the procedure; notes that the education of pupils with disabilities, denial of healthcare services for persons with disabilities and the accessibility of public spaces and services were of further concern to petitioners in 2024; recalls the annual workshop of 2 December 2024 on the rights of persons with disabilities held by the Committee on Petitions, focusing on the state of play of the strategy for the rights of persons with disabilities 2021-2030 and urges the swift integration of petition findings into the mid-term review of the strategy for the rights of persons with disabilities 2021-2030, with measurable targets and budgetary commitments;

15. Recalls the fact that relations with the European Ombudsman represent one of the responsibilities conferred on the Committee on Petitions by Parliament’s Rules of Procedure; welcomes Parliament’s constructive cooperation with the European Ombudsman, with whom the Committee on Petitions shares the objectives of ensuring the transparency, professionalism and integrity of the EU institutions vis-à-vis European citizens, as well as its involvement in the European Network of Ombudsmen;

17. Underlines the specific protection role played by the Committee on Petitions within the EU in the framework of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities; points to the committee’s important ongoing work in connection with petitions concerning issues related to disabilities; recalls that reference to petitions on the need for an EU-wide disability card has been included in Directive (EU) 2024/2841 establishing the European Disability Card and European Parking Card; underlines that petitions can significantly contribute to the legislative process;

16. Acknowledges the European Ombudsman’s regular contributions to the work of the Committee on Petitions throughout the year; firmly believes that the Union’s institutions, bodies and agencies must ensure consistent and effective follow-up to the recommendations of the Ombudsman;

18. Recalls the fact that relations with the European Ombudsman represent one of the responsibilities conferred on the Committee on Petitions by Parliament’s Rules of Procedure; highlights the Committee on Petitions’ role in the election process of the European Ombudsman, in particular in organising the public hearing with all eligible candidates, held on 3 December 2024, which was open to all Members of the European Parliament, thus giving them the democratic and transparent opportunity to exchange views with the candidates and assess their independence, qualifications and professionalism as well as their vision for the office of the European Ombudsman within the EU institutional architecture; welcomes Parliament’s constructive cooperation with the European Ombudsman, with whom the Committee on Petitions shares the objectives of ensuring the transparency, professionalism and integrity of the EU institutions vis-à-vis European citizens, as well as its involvement in the European Network of Ombudsmen;

17. Notes that, despite the parliamentary recess due to the European elections, the Committee on Petitions expressed its position and made recommendations on important issues raised in petitions, including adopting two mission reports following fact-finding visits;

19. Encourages the continued regular contributions of the European Ombudsman to the work of the Committee on Petitions throughout the year; firmly believes that the Union’s institutions, bodies and agencies must ensure consistent and effective follow-up to the recommendations of the Ombudsman; emphasises the essential role of the European Ombudsman in promoting transparency, good administration and the protection of citizens’ rights; calls for closer cooperation between the Committee on Petitions and the Ombudsman’s office;

20. Notes that, despite the parliamentary recess due to the European elections, the Committee on Petitions expressed its position and made recommendations on important issues raised in petitions, including adopting two mission reports following fact-finding visits held in the second half of 2023, namely a mission to Ireland on mica buildings and a mission to Spain on linguistic immersion in Catalonia; stresses the importance of the implementation by the Catalonian authorities of the recommendations made by the Committee on Petitions in its report of 19 March 2024, intended to safeguard the linguistic rights of students and their families;

21. Notes the growing number of petitions relating to education policy, particularly the recognition of teaching qualifications across Member States; highlights, in this regard, the Committee on Petition’s Oral Question to the Commission on the working conditions of teachers in the EU; is alarmed by the Commission’s oral reply confirming that teacher shortages are a serious challenge, which is also reflected in the recent PISA results, with not even one Member State managing to improve their performance in basic skills; calls, in this respect, on the Commission and the Member States to significantly increase their efforts towards improving their school education systems while also increasing the attractiveness of the teaching profession, including through funding and programmes;

19.23. Underlines that the Petitions Web Portal is an essential tool for ensuring a smooth, efficient and transparent petitions process; welcomes the improvementimprovements made onto the portal for the benefit of petitioners and stresses that efforts to make the portal more accessible must be continued, including making it more accessible for sign language users as requested in petition 1056/2016 and for persons with disabilities; notes that the Petitions Web Portal has beenis one of Parliament’s most visited websites, thus serving as a first point of contact with Parliament for many EU citizens;