The European Parliament Calls for More Decisive EU Interferences in Defense of the “Rule of Law”

The European Parliament has adopted a resolution concerning the European Commission’s report on the rule of law for 2025, at a plenary session by 387 votes in favor, 191 against, and 46 abstentions, noting that (despite many years of monitoring efforts) threats to the fundamental principles of the rule of law in the European Union still persist. The document emphasizes that many of the European Commission’s recommendations remain unimplemented, which—according to Members of the European Parliament—points to the limited effectiveness of the supervisory instruments used to date against Member States.

The resolution assesses the functioning of the annual rule-of-law reporting mechanism and indicates the need to strengthen it. MEPs noted that the recurring nature of the recommendations addressed to Member States indicates a lack of real progress” in certain areas, which may lead to the perpetuation of systemic problems.

The document extensively discusses issues related to judicial independence. The importance of ensuring the institutional autonomy of the courts is emphasized, including transparent nomination procedures and disciplinary mechanisms free from political influence. The need to protect judges and prosecutors from pressure that could affect the performance of their duties is also highlighted.

An important element of the resolution is also the analysis of issues related to corruption. The European Parliament indicates that insufficient effectiveness of anti-corruption measures may lead to undermining citizens’ trust in public institutions and weakening the principle of equality before the law. Accordingly, calls are made to strengthen the mechanisms for prosecuting corruption offenses, including at the highest levels of government.

The resolution also addresses issues of media freedom and the functioning of civil society. It is emphasized that media pluralism and the operational freedom of civil society organizations are essential elements of a democratic state governed by the rule of law. Attention is drawn to cases of political pressure, concentration of media ownership, and the use of legal instruments to restrict criticism.

The document also highlights the links between compliance with the rule of law and the protection of fundamental rights. Members of the European Parliament emphasize that violations in one of these areas may lead to negative consequences in others, directly affecting the situation of European Union citizens.

The European Parliament resolution extensively addresses the limited effectiveness of the existing mechanism for the European Commission’s annual reports on the rule of law. MEPs point out that a significant share of the recommendations addressed to the Member States remains unimplemented, and their recurrence in successive editions of the report attests to structural difficulties in enforcing rule-of-law standards. Accordingly, the Parliament calls for strengthening the status of these recommendations and for linking them more closely to specific enforcement instruments.

The European Parliament’s resolution, however, does not address the issue of the highly subjective, political nature of the chapters of the European Commission’s report on the rule of law regarding individual countries, depending on political preferences.

See also:

•  When Defending the Rule of Law Serves Politics: The European Commission’s Report on Poland

However, the document emphasizes the need for more decisive use of the available legal instruments, including infringement proceedings and the budgetary conditionality mechanism. The European Parliament points out that EU funds should be linked to respect for the rule of law, and their disbursement may be limited in situations where there is a risk of breaches affecting the sound management of the EU’s finances. At the same time, the need to ensure transparency and proportionality in the use of these mechanisms is emphasized. However, as the Ordo Iuris Institute pointed out in an analysis published in January of this year in response to an analysis by the European Parliament’s Analytical Office, the “money for the rule of law” mechanism in fact requires abolition, not adjustment.

Another important element of the resolution is the further development of the concept of linking the rule of law with the protection of the European Union budget. The European Parliament points out that violations concerning judicial independence or the effectiveness of law enforcement authorities can directly affect Member States’ ability to prevent financial fraud and protect the EU’s financial interests. In this context, the role of institutions such as the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) and the need for the Member States’ full cooperation with this body is emphasized.

See also:

• How the New EU Budget Is Set to Become a Powerful Tool for Exerting Influence on Member States
• SAFE—National Debt Under Foreign Control

The resolution also highlights the practice of using judicial proceedings to exert pressure on journalists, civil society organizations, and individuals engaged in public debate. In this context, it is noted that there is a need to counter so-called SLAPP lawsuits (strategic lawsuits against public participation), which can lead to restrictions on freedom of speech and pluralism in public debate. The European Parliament emphasizes the need to adopt effective legal instruments to protect against such practices.

The issue of media freedom and pluralism also occupies a significant place in the document. Parliament highlights the risks associated with the concentration of media ownership, the lack of transparency in funding, and potential political influence. It is emphasized in the resolution that independent media are one of the pillars of the rule of law, and that their weakening may lead to reduced public oversight of the actions of public authorities.

The resolution also elaborates on the protection of civil society, highlighting the need to ensure that non-governmental organizations have stable operating conditions, including access to funding and protection against unwarranted legal and administrative restrictions. The European Parliament emphasizes that an active civil society constitutes an essential element of the system of checks and balances and contributes to strengthening democratic standards.

The key elements of the document also include a reference to digital threats to the rule of law, including the use of spyware against journalists, politicians, and civil society activists. The European Parliament points out that the use of such tools should be subject to strict oversight and clear legal frameworks to prevent abuse and protect fundamental rights.

The resolution further emphasizes the importance of consistently applying rule of law standards to all Member States. Members of the European Parliament point out that monitoring mechanisms should be free from selectivity and based on uniform assessment criteria. At the same time, the document emphasizes the need to further develop EU tools in this area, which could lead to the gradual strengthening, outside the Treaties, of the EU institutions’ competences in overseeing national systems.

In a broader perspective, the resolution forms part of the process of deepening the extra-treaty process of appropriating competences in the area of ill-defined “values” (subject to the subjective assessment of EU institutions) and the general principles of the European Union. The European Parliament clearly advocates a more active role for EU institutions in monitoring and enforcing rule-of-law standards as the majority of MEPs understand them, which—as stated in the resolution—is, in their eyes, of key importance for the protection of citizens’ rights and the proper functioning of the entire EU system.

Poland in light of the European Parliament’s resolution

The resolution concerning the European Commission’s 2025 Rule of Law Report addresses the situation in individual Member States, including Poland. The document primarily notes the closure of the procedure under Article 7(1) TEU concerning Poland, which the Commission announced on May 29, 2024, although at that time no changes had yet been made to the laws that were allegedly incompatible with the EU’s rule-of-law standards, which is not noted in the European Parliament resolution.

The European Parliament recalls its previous resolutions concerning Poland, including the Article 7 procedure launched in 2017, and stresses the importance of the full independence of the judiciary and compliance with the standards stemming from the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union. The resolution calls for further ensuring the independence of disciplinary mechanisms for judges and transparent procedures for appointing judges. It does not, however, address the changes in the positions of prosecutors and of court presidents and vice presidents made by Donald Tusk’s government in violation of Polish law.

See also:

• Ordo Iuris experts raise the alarm in Poland: “The Tusk government systematically violates the principles of a democratic state governed by the rule of law.”

A key element of the European Parliament resolution is the emphasis on the need for full compliance with the judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights. The resolution notes that the effective implementation of these judgments is crucial for the uniformity of the Union’s legal order. This means that the majority in the European Parliament takes the view, among other things, that the rulings of the CJEU have primacy over the constitutions of the Member States, although this is often at odds with the position of the country’s constitutional court, of which these MEPs are citizens.

The European Parliament’s resolution also addresses general issues regarding the functioning of constitutional institutions, mechanisms ensuring the balance of powers, and the transparency of the legislative process. It emphasizes the importance of institutional stability, avoiding excessively rapid changes to the law, and strengthening democratic oversight and legal certainty.

The document also addresses issues of civil society, media freedom, and fundamental rights. The European Parliament calls for ensuring media pluralism, protecting journalists, safeguarding the freedom of NGOs to operate, and effective protection against discrimination and hate crimes.

In a broader context, the resolution underlines that the situation in all Member States, including in Poland, should be assessed within a coherent and objective rule-of-law monitoring mechanism based on uniform criteria. The European Parliament calls for the consistent enforcement of the European Commission’s recommendations and the effective use of available EU instruments, including financial mechanisms, in cases where there is a risk of breaches of the rule of law.

At a general level, the document emphasizes the growing role of the Union institutions in protecting the values set out in general terms in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union, as well as the need for the consistent and equal application of the rule of law mechanisms to all Member States.

Conclusions of the European Parliament

The European Parliament calls on the European Commission to further strengthen the mechanism for protecting the so-called rule of law, in particular to more effectively monitor the implementation of recommendations and to make full use of all available legal and financial instruments in cases where there is a risk of breaches of the principles of the “rule of law.”

The resolution emphasizes that adherence to the principles of the rule of law, democracy, and the protection of fundamental rights is essential for the proper functioning of the European Union, for mutual trust among the Member States, and for the protection of the rights of all EU citizens.

The document also highlights the important role of EU institutions in monitoring democratic standards and the rule of law in EU member states. The European Parliament calls for the consistent, objective and equal application of the mechanisms for the protection of the Union’s values, as set out in general terms in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union, to all Member States.

At the same time, it fails to address the problem of widespread violations of treaty provisions and the accompanying unwarranted interference in the internal affairs of the Member States, in particular the violation of Article 4 of the Treaty on European Union, which states that “competences not conferred upon the Union in the Treaties remain with the Member States” as well as the violation of Article 51 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which states that “[t]he provisions of this Charter are addressed to the institutions, bodies, offices and agencies of the Union with due regard for the principle of subsidiarity and to the Member States only when they are implementing Union law.”

“The adopted resolution is part of a broader trend of expanding the role of European Union institutions in assessing the legal systems of the Member States. However, it should be emphasized that the Union’s powers regarding the rule of law are limited in nature and cannot lead to interference in the constitutional order of the Member States or to supplanting their authorities in shaping the judiciary. The debate on the rule of law should take into account the need to respect the sovereignty of Member States and the limits of competences set out in the treaties,” comments Julia Książek from the Ordo Iuris Institute’s Center for International Law.

Source of cover photo: iStock