On the implementation of the rule of law conditionality regime
A-10-2025-0240
Committee on Budgets Committee on Budgetary Control · Rapporteur: Jean-Marc Germain, Monika Hohlmeier
- Voted on · Adopted 386–184–15 · See the decision →
- Full procedure 2025/2061
Written by a language model from the full text only; every figure comes from the text. The paragraph links open the paragraph a statement rests on — check the text itself before relying on it.
Parliament's resolution assesses the implementation of the EU's rule of law conditionality regime, which links EU funding to respect for the rule of law. It finds the regime effective but underused, and calls for more consistent, transparent and timely application across all member states.¶¶¶ The resolution demands that the Commission improve transparency and information sharing with Parliament, revise its guidelines, and ensure that suspended funds are only released after verifiable compliance. It also calls for better protection of final recipients of EU funds and for a unified framework for all rule of law tools.¶¶¶
Key points
- Recalls that the rule of law is a founding EU value and essential for sound financial management of the EU budget; stresses the Conditionality Regulation applies to the whole budget without time limit.¶¶
- Rejects claims of legal uncertainty about the rule of law concept; calls on the Commission to include restrictions on civic space and media pluralism as risk indicators.¶
- Regrets that the Commission did not trigger the mechanism earlier and that only two formal notifications have been sent; stresses the gap between findings and enforcement undermines credibility.¶¶
- Calls for consistent application across all member states, rejecting political bargaining; insists the tool must not be used only as a last resort and that partial suspensions can be applied early.¶¶
- Demands that suspended funds be released only after full remediation verified in practice, with objective benchmarks and on-site checks; calls for ex post audits to prevent backsliding.¶
- Calls on the Commission to swiftly resuspend or recover funds if remedial actions are reversed; expects immediate notification of such actions.¶
- Regrets the Commission's interpretation of the regulation as a last resort and the fragmentation of responsibilities; calls for a unified, coherent framework for all rule of law tools.¶¶
- Insists that rule of law measures under different instruments be treated as a single package; no payments should be made if deficiencies persist in any area.¶
- Urges the Commission to reject transfers of frozen funds to other programmes that would circumvent measures; requests full text of any such transfer requests be submitted to Parliament.¶
- Regrets the lack of transparency and information provided to Parliament; demands systematic, timely access to all relevant documentation, including written notifications and correspondence.¶¶¶
- Calls for better protection of final recipients and beneficiaries, including direct payment procedures and communication; stresses they should not be penalised for government violations.¶¶
- Calls for revision of the 2022 Guidelines to address fund diversion, publish proportionality methodology, define 'sufficiently direct link', and provide solutions for backsliding.¶
Who is affected
- Member states receiving EU funds: must respect the rule of law to avoid suspension of funds; must honour commitments to final recipients.¶¶
- Final recipients and beneficiaries of EU funds: should not be penalised for government breaches; need better protection and access to funding.¶
- Civil society organisations: need adequate EU funding and protection; their input is important for rule of law monitoring.¶¶
- Whistle-blowers and investigative journalists: need protection against reprisals; such reprisals should be aggravating factors.¶
Figures and deadlines
Legal basis: Articles 2, 4(3) and 7 TEU¶