Brussels, 14/04/2015 (Agence Europe) - The European Commission has the power to withdraw a legislative proposal during negotiations with the Council of the EU and the European Parliament if it forms the view that amendments could water down or alter the objectives of the proposed legislation. It will be for the Court of Justice to determine whether the grounds for any such decision are sound. Such was the ruling by European judges on Tuesday 14 April (case C-409/13).
Although there is no provision in the treaties for the Commission's having the power of withdrawal, the Commission regularly carries out what is known in institutional jargon as administrative clean-up. However, in the view of the Council, which referred the matter to the Court of Justice, when the Commission withdrew a proposal for a framework regulation on macro-financial assistance (MFA) in 2013, when inter-institutional negotiations were on-going, it overstepped its powers.
In its ruling, the Court concurred with Advocate General Niilo Jaaskinen in his reasoning in December 2014 (see EUROPE 11221). Until such time as the Council has adopted its position at first reading, the Commission may amend or even withdraw a legislative proposal. This, however, must not be a right of veto, the judges state. In the event of a text being withdrawn, the Commission must, therefore, set out its reasons and provide the other two institutions with compelling arguments for its action.
The reasons for withdrawal of a text must be linked to concerns that the proposal is being distorted, that is to say, that the amendments sought by the Council or the Parliament may prevent achievement of the initial objectives of the proposal. Here, the Court gave itself a right of scrutiny that the Advocate General did not wish to accord it. The judges formed the view that, in such a situation, the Court had to have the power of judicial oversight to assess the merits of the Commission's reasons, both with regard to their wording and to the context. In the case at issue, on MFA, the Court ruled that the Commission was within its rights to withdraw the proposal. (Jan Kordys)