The vote at the European Parliament on referring the EU/Mercosur agreement to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) for its opinion on the agreement’s compatibility with the European treaties on Wednesday 21 January will be “very close”, according to several Members of Parliament.
Among political groups, some national delegations opposed to the agreement with the Mercosur countries, such as the French and Polish delegations, consider essential to have recourse to the Court’s opinion, while the fervent defenders of this opening up to the South American market, such as the Germans and Spaniards, are concerned that this request could delay the ratification process in the European Parliament.
The institution must give its consent following the signing of the trade agreement in Paraguay on Saturday 17 January (see EUROPE 13789/14). However, it could take between six and ten months for the CJEU to examine the case.
According to Jörgen Warborn (Swedish), the EPP spokesman on International Trade, this request for an opinion from the Court is seen as a manoeuvre to delay the ratification process in Parliament. But even within the group, differences remain over final support for the EU/Mercosur agreement.
Citing the interests of their country’s farmers, some Spanish MEPs from the EPP group may finally withdraw their support for the free trade agreement - and before doing so, vote in favour of referring the matter to the Court.
In response to rumours that the EPP had requested a secret ballot, Mr Warborn denied this: “For the time being, I don’t think there will be a secret ballot. It will be a transparent vote”.
For the ECR group, members are free to vote as they see fit. On the final vote in support of the trade agreement, Fratelli d'Italia is expected to vote in favour, while the Polish PiS will vote against, explained the group’s Co-Chair, Nicola Procaccini (Italian).
On the far right (PfE) and the far left (The Left), one can expect a massive rejection of the final agreement and support for a referral to the Court of Justice.
Defenders of the agreement, such as S&D President Iratxe García Pérez (Spanish), said that it would be unreasonable to delay the ratification process at a time of unprecedented trade tensions with the United States (see other news).
Resolution postponed. Back in November, 145 MEPs from five different political groups signed the resolution in favour of referring the case to the Court, before the vote was postponed by the President of the European Parliament, Roberta Metsola, until the Member States had taken a decision (see EUROPE 13755/21).
In particular, the signatories questioned the splitting of the agreement into two separate legal texts, the EU-Mercosur Partnership Agreement and the Interim Agreement on Trade, as well as the rebalancing clause, which allows one party to claim compensation in the event of damage.
They are also concerned that this mechanism could be “used by Mercosur countries to put pressure on the EU to refrain from adopting or applying legislation and other measures relating to climate and environmental protection, food safety or the banning of certain pesticides”.
The President of Renew Europe, Valérie Hayer (French), said that there are “serious concerns about this clause”. “This could set a serious precedent for the EU and future agreements”, such as the free trade agreement with India.
Making the distinction with the ratification vote. While it is tempting to use the results of this vote as a basis for making predictions about the final agreement on ratification of the EU-Mercosur agreement by the European Parliament, some MEPs are sounding a note of caution.
For the Greens/EFA co-president, Terry Reintke (German), it is necessary to distinguish between the vote on the Mercosur agreement and the request for an opinion from the Court of Justice. “This is not a test vote on the Mercosur agreement. This is a review by the Court of Justice. We believe in the authority of the CJEU”, she told the press.
If the request for an opinion from the CJEU is ultimately rejected, the vote to ratify the agreement at the plenary session could take place in April or May.
Before that happens, MEPs will have to vote in February on the provisional agreement with the Council of the EU on the safeguard clause attached to the agreement, allowing a safeguard investigation to be triggered under certain conditions (see EUROPE 13786/5).
Furthermore, there is still some doubt as to whether the European Commission will be able to provisionally apply the trade section of the treaty with Mercosur countries that have ratified the agreement on their side (see EUROPE 13786/5), without waiting for MEPs to vote on ratification. (Original version in French by Pauline Denys)