Skip to content
DRAFT REPORT (2025/2263(INI))

On the Institutional Framework of the European Union and its interaction with national authorities in the application of Union law, with particular reference to Article 19 TEU

AFCO-PR-788810

Committee on Constitutional Affairs · Rapporteur: Charlie Weimers

Official HTML ↗ PDF DOCX
✦ In shortFull text
✦ In short · AI summary of this text, generated 20 Oct 2026

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.

A draft report on the Court of Justice's role under Article 19 TEU and its interaction with national authorities. It reaffirms the Court's role within the limits of conferred competences and calls for higher transparency and clearer reasoning. It asks the Court to add safeguards on case allocation and judicial formations, review the President's powers, and base decisions on preliminary references on transparent criteria. It encourages the Court to explain its interpretative methods, publish concurring or dissenting opinions, keep Advocates General opinions in sensitive cases, and reconsider French as sole internal language. It proposes a reciprocal constitutional dialogue mechanism with national constitutional and supreme courts and calls on the Council and Commission to keep reforms consistent with the principle of conferral. It notes concerns raised by several national courts about the limits of Union competences and stresses respect for national constitutional identities and national competence over the organisation of justice.

Committee position. The rapporteur proposes that Parliament reaffirm the Court's role within conferred competences while calling for greater transparency in case allocation, the President's powers and preliminary reference decisions, clearer reasoning, published opinions, continued Advocates General opinions, and a reciprocal constitutional dialogue with national courts.

Key points

  1. Reaffirms the Court's role in uniform interpretation and protection of Treaty rights, anchored in the competences conferred by member states and the Treaty balance.
  2. Says the Court's constitutional role raises the need for high standards of transparency, methodological consistency, procedural legitimacy and institutional accountability.
  3. Notes concerns by constitutional and supreme courts in several member states about the limits of Union competences and the scope of judicial authority.
  4. Stresses constructive dialogue with national constitutional and supreme courts on constitutional identity, judicial independence, ultra vires review and competence limits.
  5. Says interpretations of Union law should not extend Union competences, that conferral remains a cornerstone, and that internal market provisions should not circumvent the distribution of competences.
  6. Calls for balance between effectiveness of Union law and national constitutional identities under Article 4(2) TEU, and for clear reasoning and limits around the Article 19 case-law.
  7. Underlines that organisation of justice is a national competence and that Article 267 TFEU is a mechanism of judicial dialogue, not judicial reform; notes the Court cannot replace national judicial structures.
  8. Finds the framework for allocating cases, designating reporting judges and constituting formations lacks transparency compared with the lawful-judge principle, and encourages additional safeguards.
  9. Calls for a review of the concentration of procedural and organisational powers in the office of the President of the Court.
  10. Says decisions on whether a preliminary reference goes to the Court of Justice or the General Court should rest on transparent, objective and foreseeable criteria; requests assessment of the 2024 reform's effects.
  11. Regrets abstract reasoning and limited methodological transparency; encourages the Court to state its interpretative methods and to publish concurring or dissenting opinions.
  12. Raises concern at dispensing with Advocates General opinions, at the exclusive use of French internally, and proposes a reciprocal constitutional dialogue mechanism; asks Council and Commission to keep reforms within conferral and institutional balance.

Who is affected

  • The Court of Justice of the European Union: asked to add safeguards, explain its methods and open its procedures.
  • The President of the Court: a review of the office's procedural and organisational powers is called for.
  • National constitutional and supreme courts: a structured reciprocal dialogue mechanism is proposed.
  • Member states: their competence over the organisation of justice and their constitutional identities are stressed.
  • The Council and the Commission: asked to keep future Court reforms consistent with conferral and institutional balance.