Skip to content
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION (2025/2967(RSP))

Seeking an opinion from the Court of Justice on the compatibility with the Treaties of the proposed Agreement on Digital Trade between the European Union and the Republic of Singapore

B-10-2025-0479

· Rapporteur: Martin Schirdewan, Martin Günther, Pasquale Tridico, Anthony Smith, Isabel Serra Sánchez, Jussi Saramo, Ilaria Salis, Arash Saeidi, Gaetano Pedulla’, Nikos Pappas, Valentina Palmisano, João Oliveira, Carolina Morace, Irene Montero, Catarina Martins, Mimmo Lucano, Rudi Kennes, Hanna Gedin, Estrella Galán, Kathleen Funchion, Emma Fourreau, Nikolas Farantouris, Sebastian Everding, Danilo Della Valle, Per Clausen, Giuseppe Antoci, Li Andersson, Marina Mesure, Elena Kountoura, Giorgos Georgiou, Mario Furore, Özlem Demirel, Leila Chaibi, Damien Carême, Marc Botenga, Pernando Barrena Arza, Manon Aubry, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Lynn Boylan, Luke Ming Flanagan, Dario Tamburrano, Younous Omarjee, Anja Hazekamp, Merja Kyllönen, Jonas Sjöstedt, Jaume Asens Llodrà, Michael Bloss, Saskia Bricmont, Mélissa Camara, Anna Cavazzini, David Cormand, Alexandra Geese, Markéta Gregorová, Cristina Guarda, Sergey Lagodinsky, Katrin Langensiepen, Ignazio Roberto Marino, Erik Marquardt, Vicent Marzà Ibáñez, Tilly Metz, Ana Miranda Paz, Hannah Neumann, Leoluca Orlando, Diana Riba i Giner, Mounir Satouri, Majdouline Sbai, Benedetta Scuderi, Tineke Strik, Anna Strolenberg, Marie Toussaint, Kim Van Sparrentak, Catarina Vieira, Thomas Waitz, Estelle Ceulemans, Birgit Sippel, Maria Noichl

Official HTML ↗ PDF DOCX
✦ In shortFull text
✦ In short · AI summary of this text, generated 4 Sept 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.

Parliament seeks an opinion from the Court of Justice on whether the proposed EU-Singapore Digital Trade Agreement is compatible with the Treaties, citing concerns over fundamental rights and regulatory autonomy. It identifies legal uncertainty about safeguards for privacy and data protection in cross-border data flows, and about provisions on source code that may constrain EU regulation of software and AI.

Key points

  1. Parliament decides to ask the Court of Justice for an opinion on the compatibility of the proposed agreement with the Treaties.
  2. It considers that Article 5(2) with Article 6(11) of the agreement may fail to protect privacy and data protection, conflicting with Article 16(1) TFEU and Charter Articles 7, 8, 11, 47, 52.
  3. It doubts that Article 11 on source code is compatible with EU consumer protection and regulatory autonomy, potentially hindering enforcement of digital laws like the Digital Services Act.
  4. The agreement lacks an adequacy decision for Singapore under GDPR, so personal data transfers require appropriate safeguards.
  5. Exceptions in the agreement for protecting fundamental rights differ from criteria in Article 52(1) of the Charter, raising compatibility and proportionality questions.
  6. The agreement does not define 'source code of software' and restricts EU institutions' access, weakening accountability under EU digital regulations.
  7. Restrictions on source code access may extend to AI components like training data, creating new intellectual property protections that limit regulatory access.

Who is affected

  • EU citizens: their privacy and personal data protection may be weakened by cross-border data flow provisions.
  • EU institutions: their ability to regulate, audit, and enforce rules on software and AI may be constrained.
  • Consumers: risk from potential weakening of digital legislation enforcement.

Legal basis: Article 218(11) TFEU