# C_2022347EN.01011001.xml

| 9.9.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 347/110 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.9.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 347/110

---

P9_TA(2022)0066

Engaging with citizens: the right to petition and refer to the European Ombudsman, the European Citizens’ Initiative

European Parliament resolution of 9 March 2022 on engaging with citizens: the right to petition, the right to refer to the European Ombudsman and the European Citizens’ Initiative (2020/2275(INI))

(2022/C 347/09)

The European Parliament,

| — | having regard to Articles 10 and 11 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Articles 10 and 11 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU),

| — | having regard to Articles 24 and 227 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), which reflect the importance the Treaty attaches to the right of EU citizens and residents to bring their concerns to the attention of Parliament, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Articles 24 and 227 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), which reflect the importance the Treaty attaches to the right of EU citizens and residents to bring their concerns to the attention of Parliament,

| — | having regard to Article 228 TFEU on the role and functions of the European Ombudsman, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Article 228 TFEU on the role and functions of the European Ombudsman,

| — | having regard to the Council measure setting up the Revised EU-level Framework Required by Article 33.2 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the Council measure setting up the Revised EU-level Framework Required by Article 33.2 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD),

| — | having regard to Articles 11, 41, 42, 43 and 44 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’) concerning the right to petition the European Parliament, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Articles 11, 41, 42, 43 and 44 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’) concerning the right to petition the European Parliament,

| — | having regard to the provisions of the TFEU relating to the infringement procedure and, in particular, to Articles 258 and 260 TFEU, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the provisions of the TFEU relating to the infringement procedure and, in particular, to Articles 258 and 260 TFEU,

| — | having regard to its resolutions stemming from the conclusions of the Committee on Petitions’ deliberations, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to its resolutions stemming from the conclusions of the Committee on Petitions’ deliberations,

| — | having regard to Rules 222, 230 and 216 of its Rules of Procedure, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Rules 222, 230 and 216 of its Rules of Procedure,

| — | having regard to Article 10(3) TEU, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Article 10(3) TEU,

| — | having regard to Article 20 TFEU concerning the right to petition the European Parliament, to apply to the European Ombudsman, and to address the institutions and advisory bodies of the Union in any of the languages of the Treaties and to obtain a reply in the same language, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Article 20 TFEU concerning the right to petition the European Parliament, to apply to the European Ombudsman, and to address the institutions and advisory bodies of the Union in any of the languages of the Treaties and to obtain a reply in the same language,

| — | having regard to Decision 94/262/ECSC, EC, Euratom of the European Parliament of 9 March 1994 on the regulations and general conditions governing the performance of the Ombudsman’s duties (1), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Decision 94/262/ECSC, EC, Euratom of the European Parliament of 9 March 1994 on the regulations and general conditions governing the performance of the Ombudsman’s duties (1),

| — | having regard to its previous resolutions on the European Ombudsman’s activities, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to its previous resolutions on the European Ombudsman’s activities,

| — | having regard to Regulation (EU) 2019/788 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2019 on the European citizens’ initiative (2), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Regulation (EU) 2019/788 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2019 on the European citizens’ initiative (2),

| — | having regard to Regulation (EU) 2020/1042 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 July 2020 laying down temporary measures concerning the time limits for the collection, the verification and the examination stages provided for in Regulation (EU) 2019/788 on the European citizens’ initiative in view of the COVID-19 outbreak (3), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Regulation (EU) 2020/1042 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 July 2020 laying down temporary measures concerning the time limits for the collection, the verification and the examination stages provided for in Regulation (EU) 2019/788 on the European citizens’ initiative in view of the COVID-19 outbreak (3),

| — | having regard to Rule 54 of its Rules of Procedure, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Rule 54 of its Rules of Procedure,

| — | having regard to the opinion of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the opinion of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs,

| — | having regard to the report of the Committee on Petitions (A9-0018/2022), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Petitions (A9-0018/2022),

| A. | whereas Article 10(3) TEU provides that ‘[e]very citizen shall have the right to participate in the democratic life of the Union’ and that ‘[d]ecisions shall be taken as openly and as closely as possible to the citizen’; |
| --- | --- |

A.

whereas Article 10(3) TEU provides that ‘[e]very citizen shall have the right to participate in the democratic life of the Union’ and that ‘[d]ecisions shall be taken as openly and as closely as possible to the citizen’;

| B. | whereas the Committee on Petitions plays a ‘protection role’ in order to ensure the EU’s compliance with the CRPD within policymaking and legislative actions at EU level; whereas Parliament’s Committee on Petitions has been identified to form the EU Framework together with the European Ombudsman, the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights and the European Disability Forum in the Revised EU-level Framework as adopted by the Council at its 3513th meeting held on 16 January 2017; |
| --- | --- |

B.

whereas the Committee on Petitions plays a ‘protection role’ in order to ensure the EU’s compliance with the CRPD within policymaking and legislative actions at EU level; whereas Parliament’s Committee on Petitions has been identified to form the EU Framework together with the European Ombudsman, the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights and the European Disability Forum in the Revised EU-level Framework as adopted by the Council at its 3513th meeting held on 16 January 2017;

| C. | whereas improving citizens’ participation and transparency at EU level is the key to closing the perceived gap between the EU and its citizens, and representative organisations; |
| --- | --- |

C.

whereas improving citizens’ participation and transparency at EU level is the key to closing the perceived gap between the EU and its citizens, and representative organisations;

| D. | whereas the right to petition the European Parliament is one of the fundamental rights of EU citizens, enshrined in Article 44 of the Charter; |
| --- | --- |

D.

whereas the right to petition the European Parliament is one of the fundamental rights of EU citizens, enshrined in Article 44 of the Charter;

| E. | whereas the number of petitions has remained modest in relation to the total population of the EU, confirming the need for major efforts and tailored measures to increase public awareness and achieve significant improvements concerning the exercise of the right to petition; whereas on average around 1 200 petitions are submitted to the European Parliament each year; |
| --- | --- |

E.

whereas the number of petitions has remained modest in relation to the total population of the EU, confirming the need for major efforts and tailored measures to increase public awareness and achieve significant improvements concerning the exercise of the right to petition; whereas on average around 1 200 petitions are submitted to the European Parliament each year;

| F. | whereas the number of petitions submitted to the European Parliament peaked in 2013 and is now falling; whereas a great many European citizens remain unaware of the right to petition; |
| --- | --- |

F.

whereas the number of petitions submitted to the European Parliament peaked in 2013 and is now falling; whereas a great many European citizens remain unaware of the right to petition;

| G. | whereas the eligibility criteria for petitions are laid down in Article 227 TFEU and Rule 226 of Parliament’s Rules of Procedure, which require that petitions must be submitted by EU citizens or residents directly affected by matters falling within the EU’s fields of activity; |
| --- | --- |

G.

whereas the eligibility criteria for petitions are laid down in Article 227 TFEU and Rule 226 of Parliament’s Rules of Procedure, which require that petitions must be submitted by EU citizens or residents directly affected by matters falling within the EU’s fields of activity;

| H. | whereas Parliament has the most open and transparent petitions process in the EU, allowing petitioners to participate in its activities, including debates in committee and hearings; |
| --- | --- |

H.

whereas Parliament has the most open and transparent petitions process in the EU, allowing petitioners to participate in its activities, including debates in committee and hearings;

| I. | whereas its Committee on Petitions examines and processes each petition and is the only committee that maintains a daily dialogue with citizens; |
| --- | --- |

I.

whereas its Committee on Petitions examines and processes each petition and is the only committee that maintains a daily dialogue with citizens;

| J. | whereas the right to petition is often exercised by individuals; |
| --- | --- |

J.

whereas the right to petition is often exercised by individuals;

| K. | whereas enhancing the right to petition can only be achieved by improving the capacity of the EU institutions and the Member States to arrive at timely and effective solutions to issues raised by petitioners, while ensuring the full protection of citizens’ fundamental rights; |
| --- | --- |

K.

whereas enhancing the right to petition can only be achieved by improving the capacity of the EU institutions and the Member States to arrive at timely and effective solutions to issues raised by petitioners, while ensuring the full protection of citizens’ fundamental rights;

| L. | whereas some petitions are declared inadmissible due to the lack of information or to confusion among citizens about the competences of the European Union; |
| --- | --- |

L.

whereas some petitions are declared inadmissible due to the lack of information or to confusion among citizens about the competences of the European Union;

| M. | whereas the Commission has still failed to provide comprehensive information on the number of petitions that have led to the initiation of an infringement procedure or to any other legislative or non-legislative action; |
| --- | --- |

M.

whereas the Commission has still failed to provide comprehensive information on the number of petitions that have led to the initiation of an infringement procedure or to any other legislative or non-legislative action;

| N. | whereas a revision of Parliament’s Rules of Procedure is necessary to improve the relevant rules concerning the petition process with a view to enhancing the visibility and follow-up of petitions, including in Parliament’s plenary activities, in order to integrate the issues raised through petitions more effectively into the priorities of the EU’s political agenda; |
| --- | --- |

N.

whereas a revision of Parliament’s Rules of Procedure is necessary to improve the relevant rules concerning the petition process with a view to enhancing the visibility and follow-up of petitions, including in Parliament’s plenary activities, in order to integrate the issues raised through petitions more effectively into the priorities of the EU’s political agenda;

| O. | whereas the Commission based its strategy to deal with petitions on its 2016 communication entitled ‘EU law: Better results through better application’, which has no provisions establishing administrative procedures or practices concerning petitions; |
| --- | --- |

O.

whereas the Commission based its strategy to deal with petitions on its 2016 communication entitled ‘EU law: Better results through better application’, which has no provisions establishing administrative procedures or practices concerning petitions;

| P. | whereas the TFEU reinforces citizenship of the Union and further enhances the democratic functioning of the Union by providing, inter alia, that every citizen has the right to participate in the democratic life of the Union through a European citizens’ initiative (ECI); |
| --- | --- |

P.

whereas the TFEU reinforces citizenship of the Union and further enhances the democratic functioning of the Union by providing, inter alia, that every citizen has the right to participate in the democratic life of the Union through a European citizens’ initiative (ECI);

| Q. | whereas emphasis should be placed on the importance of the ECI in shaping EU policy initiatives and developments; |
| --- | --- |

Q.

whereas emphasis should be placed on the importance of the ECI in shaping EU policy initiatives and developments;

| R. | whereas EU citizens have the right to apply to the Commission directly to ask it to submit a proposal for a legal act of the Union for the purpose of implementing the Treaties; |
| --- | --- |

R.

whereas EU citizens have the right to apply to the Commission directly to ask it to submit a proposal for a legal act of the Union for the purpose of implementing the Treaties;

| S. | whereas the EU must guarantee citizens, with particular regard to the special needs of persons with disabilities, the right to participate actively in the democratic activities of the European Union in any of the official languages of the EU in order to avoid any kind of discrimination and to promote multilingualism; |
| --- | --- |

S.

whereas the EU must guarantee citizens, with particular regard to the special needs of persons with disabilities, the right to participate actively in the democratic activities of the European Union in any of the official languages of the EU in order to avoid any kind of discrimination and to promote multilingualism;

| T. | whereas the ECI thereby helps strengthen the democratic functioning of the Union through the participation of citizens in its democratic and political life; whereas the ECI should be regarded as one of the ways in which citizens can bring certain issues to the attention of the EU institutions and approach them to legislate on issues that are within the EU’s competences and affect citizens, alongside dialogue with representative associations and civil society, stakeholder consultations, the right to petition and the right to submit complaints to the European Ombudsman; |
| --- | --- |

T.

whereas the ECI thereby helps strengthen the democratic functioning of the Union through the participation of citizens in its democratic and political life; whereas the ECI should be regarded as one of the ways in which citizens can bring certain issues to the attention of the EU institutions and approach them to legislate on issues that are within the EU’s competences and affect citizens, alongside dialogue with representative associations and civil society, stakeholder consultations, the right to petition and the right to submit complaints to the European Ombudsman;

| U. | whereas Regulation (EU) 2019/788, which entered into force on 1 January 2020, has made the ECI more accessible and easier to implement for organisers, in particular by means of the translation of initiatives into all official EU languages; |
| --- | --- |

U.

whereas Regulation (EU) 2019/788, which entered into force on 1 January 2020, has made the ECI more accessible and easier to implement for organisers, in particular by means of the translation of initiatives into all official EU languages;

| V. | whereas the Commission has listed a number of problems relating to the implementation of Regulation (EU) No 211/2011 (4) and whereas the new Regulation (EU) 2019/788 aims to address those issues in detail with regard to the effectiveness of the ECI as an instrument, and to bring improvements to the way it operates; whereas its implementation needs to be assessed effectively and in a timely manner; whereas in any case, a formal report should be presented by the Commission no later than 1 January 2024, and every four years thereafter; |
| --- | --- |

V.

whereas the Commission has listed a number of problems relating to the implementation of Regulation (EU) No 211/2011 (4) and whereas the new Regulation (EU) 2019/788 aims to address those issues in detail with regard to the effectiveness of the ECI as an instrument, and to bring improvements to the way it operates; whereas its implementation needs to be assessed effectively and in a timely manner; whereas in any case, a formal report should be presented by the Commission no later than 1 January 2024, and every four years thereafter;

| W. | whereas, in order to achieve those objectives and realise the full potential of the ECI, the procedures and conditions required for the ECI should ensure that initiatives which are valid in the sense of Article 14(1) of Regulation (EU) 2019/788 are considered and responded to appropriately by the Commission; whereas the Commission is legally obliged to state the action it intends to take on a valid ECI, if any, and to state the reasons for taking or not taking action, which it should do in a clear, comprehensible and detailed manner; whereas at least one million signatures from at least a quarter of the Member States are required for an ECI to be valid and to be submitted to the Commission; whereas Regulation (EU) 2020/1042 has made the time limits for the collection, verification and examination stages more flexible in response to the COVID-19 pandemic through the introduction of temporary measures; whereas the application of those measures has been extended through Commission implementing acts; whereas this regulation is only temporary in nature and applicable only until the end of 2022, which is also the date by which the individual online collection systems provided for by Article 11 of Regulation (EU) 2019/788 will be phased out; |
| --- | --- |

W.

whereas, in order to achieve those objectives and realise the full potential of the ECI, the procedures and conditions required for the ECI should ensure that initiatives which are valid in the sense of Article 14(1) of Regulation (EU) 2019/788 are considered and responded to appropriately by the Commission; whereas the Commission is legally obliged to state the action it intends to take on a valid ECI, if any, and to state the reasons for taking or not taking action, which it should do in a clear, comprehensible and detailed manner; whereas at least one million signatures from at least a quarter of the Member States are required for an ECI to be valid and to be submitted to the Commission; whereas Regulation (EU) 2020/1042 has made the time limits for the collection, verification and examination stages more flexible in response to the COVID-19 pandemic through the introduction of temporary measures; whereas the application of those measures has been extended through Commission implementing acts; whereas this regulation is only temporary in nature and applicable only until the end of 2022, which is also the date by which the individual online collection systems provided for by Article 11 of Regulation (EU) 2019/788 will be phased out;

| X. | whereas organising and supporting an ECI is a political right for the citizens of the Union and a unique instrument for setting the priorities for participatory democracy in the EU, allowing the public to play an active role in the projects and processes that affect them; whereas there have been six valid ECIs to date, all of which received a response from the Commission, most recently the Minority SafePack and End the Cage Age initiatives; whereas these initiatives were the first ECIs to have been debated in Parliament after the entry into force of the new Regulation (EU) 2019/788 and in accordance with the newly introduced Rule 222(8) of Parliament’s Rules of Procedure; whereas the subsequent resolutions were adopted by Parliament in December 2020 and June 2021 respectively, with overwhelming majorities of 76 % and 82 % of the votes cast; |
| --- | --- |

X.

whereas organising and supporting an ECI is a political right for the citizens of the Union and a unique instrument for setting the priorities for participatory democracy in the EU, allowing the public to play an active role in the projects and processes that affect them; whereas there have been six valid ECIs to date, all of which received a response from the Commission, most recently the Minority SafePack and End the Cage Age initiatives; whereas these initiatives were the first ECIs to have been debated in Parliament after the entry into force of the new Regulation (EU) 2019/788 and in accordance with the newly introduced Rule 222(8) of Parliament’s Rules of Procedure; whereas the subsequent resolutions were adopted by Parliament in December 2020 and June 2021 respectively, with overwhelming majorities of 76 % and 82 % of the votes cast;

| Y. | whereas the Committee on Petitions received 107 requests to launch an ECI, of which 83 were deemed eligible and qualified for registration, and of which six were successful; |
| --- | --- |

Y.

whereas the Committee on Petitions received 107 requests to launch an ECI, of which 83 were deemed eligible and qualified for registration, and of which six were successful;

| Z. | whereas one of the EU’s priority objectives must be to strengthen the democratic legitimacy of its institutions and to ensure the full transparency of the EU decision-making processes, as well as to effectively protect citizens’ fundamental rights and enhance citizens’ involvement in shaping the EU’s political agenda through instruments of citizen participation which are strengthened and more effective and transparent; |
| --- | --- |

Z.

whereas one of the EU’s priority objectives must be to strengthen the democratic legitimacy of its institutions and to ensure the full transparency of the EU decision-making processes, as well as to effectively protect citizens’ fundamental rights and enhance citizens’ involvement in shaping the EU’s political agenda through instruments of citizen participation which are strengthened and more effective and transparent;

| AA. | whereas Articles 20, 24 and 228 TFEU and Article 43 of the Charter empower the European Ombudsman to receive complaints concerning instances of maladministration in the activities of the Union institutions, bodies, offices or agencies, with the exception of the Court of Justice of the European Union acting in its judicial role; |
| --- | --- |

AA.

whereas Articles 20, 24 and 228 TFEU and Article 43 of the Charter empower the European Ombudsman to receive complaints concerning instances of maladministration in the activities of the Union institutions, bodies, offices or agencies, with the exception of the Court of Justice of the European Union acting in its judicial role;

| AB. | whereas the Ombudsman’s inquiries focus chiefly on transparency and accountability, a culture of service, proper use of discretion and respect for procedural rights; |
| --- | --- |

AB.

whereas the Ombudsman’s inquiries focus chiefly on transparency and accountability, a culture of service, proper use of discretion and respect for procedural rights;

| AC. | whereas the 25th anniversary of the establishment of the European Ombudsman was celebrated in 2020; whereas, since it opened, the Ombudsman’s office has dealt with 57 000 complaints, leading to over 7 600 inquiries; |
| --- | --- |

AC.

whereas the 25th anniversary of the establishment of the European Ombudsman was celebrated in 2020; whereas, since it opened, the Ombudsman’s office has dealt with 57 000 complaints, leading to over 7 600 inquiries;

| AD. | whereas the right to petition, the right to refer to the European Ombudsman and the ECI are participatory tools that foster transparency, participatory democracy and active European citizenship; |
| --- | --- |

AD.

whereas the right to petition, the right to refer to the European Ombudsman and the ECI are participatory tools that foster transparency, participatory democracy and active European citizenship;

The right to petition

| 1. | Points out that the right to petition is the oldest instrument involving the direct participation of citizens at EU level and that it is the easiest and most direct way for citizens to contact the EU institutions, express their views on the legislation adopted and the policy choices made at EU level, as well as lodge complaints about loopholes and poor implementation; recalls that the number of received petitions vis-à-vis the EU population remains modest and that significant differences exist between Member States, regions and languages when it comes to exercising the right to petition; believes that targeted information campaigns and civic education about EU citizenship rights can reach a wider population and bring tangible results in awareness raising about citizens’ rights at EU level; underlines that the Committee on Petitions has a wide range of instruments at its disposal, namely the drafting of reports and resolutions, public hearings, thematic workshops and fact-finding missions, with which to respond to citizens’ concerns and to induce the European Parliament, the other European institutions and national authorities to take action; calls for the Committee on Petitions to step up its collaboration with national parliaments and to create a partnership allowing the exchange of best practices; |
| --- | --- |

1.

| 2. | Recalls that the way in which the issues raised in petitions are treated has a decisive impact on citizens as regards the effective respect for the right to petition enshrined in the EU Treaties, as well as on citizens’ opinion of the institutions of the Union; |
| --- | --- |

2.

| 3. | Regrets that the Commission’s refusal to take action on issues raised in individual petitions constitutes a breach of the current EU Treaties’ provisions related to the right to petition, as it is not limited to issues of strategic importance or reflecting structural problems; |
| --- | --- |

3.

| 4. | Calls on the Commission to revise its current strategic approach in handling petitions in a timely manner, as it results in leaving untreated, inter alia, issues concerning serious violations of EU law detrimental to the protection of citizens’ rights; |
| --- | --- |

4.

| 5. | Urges Parliament and the Commission to adopt a binding interinstitutional agreement on the handling of petitions in order to ensure a clear, predictable and transparent legal framework aimed at consistently implementing the right to petition established in the EU Treaties and effectively protecting citizens’ fundamental rights; |
| --- | --- |

5.

| 6. | Underlines that the right to petition is a key element of participatory democracy; calls, in this context, on the Council and the Commission to recognise the right to petition as a vital tool for communication between citizens and the EU institutions, as well as an essential element of democratic and transparent governance at EU level; |
| --- | --- |

6.

| 7. | Recalls that many European citizens are being deprived of their right to petition, as their platforms do not comply with accessibility standards and the requirements set out in Article 33.2 of the UN CPRD; |
| --- | --- |

7.

| 8. | Notes that major improvements, within the boundaries set by the EU Treaties, are needed to meet citizens’ expectations when they exercise the right to petition in order to solve individual problems, so as to prevent situations in which the public feel disappointed in the EU institutions; calls for more information to be provided to citizens on the right to petition and for cooperation with Member States’ authorities to be enhanced in order to fully protect citizens’ rights arising from EU law; calls for the EU institutions to provide clear information regarding the right to petition and to systematically encourage recourse to this instrument; |
| --- | --- |

8.

| 9. | Takes the view that it is important to diversify the means of communication and to raise citizens’ awareness, in close cooperation with national and local associations, by means of information campaigns and an ongoing public debate on the Union’s policy areas; believes that interactive online forums should be developed where citizens can obtain information, exchange views and express themselves freely, particularly with a view to targeting young people; |
| --- | --- |

9.

| 10. | Points out that petitioners’ frustration at the lack of real solutions to their problems can result in detachment from the EU institutions, as well as a feeling of Euroscepticism due to the lack of answers; |
| --- | --- |

10.

| 11. | Calls for common criteria when dealing with the different petitions in order to guarantee the standardised and coherent treatment of the petitions and to avoid the arbitrary or partisan use of citizens’ requests; stresses that the lack of homogeneity in the treatment of petitions can cause confusion among petitioners and result in a limited will among citizens more generally to exercise the right to petition; |
| --- | --- |

11.

| 12. | Points out, with that in mind, that an overly narrow or inconsistent interpretation of Article 51 of the Charter alienates citizens from the EU; asks the Commission to come forward with measures that will ensure a coherent and extensive application of the provisions of Article 51 and calls on the Conference on the Future of Europe to address this issue; |
| --- | --- |

12.

| 13. | Draws attention to the potential that the right to petition has when it comes to warning the EU institutions about possible loopholes in Union law, or breaches or poor implementation thereof, both systemically and as regards specific cases; insists on the potential of individual petitions as a tool for the application and improvement of EU law; calls on the Commission, as guardian of the Treaties, to pay closer attention to the issues raised in petitions, including individual ones, and to ensure that they give rise to proper inquiries so that genuine improvements can be made in the correct application of EU law throughout the Union; emphasises that, in cases where the Commission does not have legislative powers, it must effectively use the possibility to act by providing coordination or support in order to offer a diligent response to the problems and needs of the petitioners; |
| --- | --- |

13.

| 14. | Observes that many petitions on COVID-19 have been dealt with by the Committee on Petitions, chiefly under the urgent procedure; congratulates the Committee on Petitions on its rapid and effective handling of petitions in times of major crisis, which is a prerequisite for citizens’ trust in the EU institutions; |
| --- | --- |

14.

| 15. | Points out that the right to petition is an essential part of EU citizenship; deeply regrets the fact that the Commission communication on the 2020 EU citizenship report and the European action plan for democracy do not mention the right to petition; sees this as a missed opportunity to raise the profile of one of the strands of EU citizenship; calls on the Commission to cover the right to petition in its policy papers; |
| --- | --- |

15.

| 16. | Calls for the implementation of a detailed analysis that would reveal the reasons why the number of registered petitions in recent years has decreased; calls on the Commission to coordinate with the Committee on Petitions to carry out a study to detect the main obstacles encountered when exercising the right to petition, as well as any communication problems that may exist; calls for the implementation of the necessary mechanisms in order to sort out the potential shortcomings and problems uncovered by the study; |
| --- | --- |

16.

| 17. | Criticises the Commission for its lack of a proper system to collect information on petitions and how they link with infringement procedures or EU acts, also confirmed by the shortcomings in the Commission’s annual reports on monitoring the application of EU law, which refer to petitions in a very general way; |
| --- | --- |

17.

| 18. | Calls on the Commission to monitor, assess and report annually on the petitions dealt with and to ensure that this assessment feeds into political decision-making at Commission level; calls on the Commission to reduce the time necessary to respond to the Parliament’s requests regarding petitions; |
| --- | --- |

18.

| 19. | Calls on the Council and the Member States to show an active involvement and participate in discussions and debates on petitions and to provide responses to questions raised by petitioners at EU level, in particular by sending the petitions to the relevant and competent authorities, ensuring adequate follow-up and participating in parliamentary debates; |
| --- | --- |

19.

| 20. | Points out the need to ensure an adequate follow-up to petitions in parliamentary and legislative work; recalls that petitions could be considered as a strategic tool to foster the right of legislative initiative of the European Parliament enshrined in Article 225 TFEU, thereby addressing the loopholes and inconsistencies of EU law highlighted through petitions in order to ensure that citizens’ rights are fully protected; |
| --- | --- |

20.

| 21. | Calls for the EU institutions and Parliament’s committees, as well as the Member States, to better cooperate with the Committee on Petitions in order to answer petitioners efficiently and satisfy their requests; considers it essential to ensure the presence and involvement of Member State representatives during discussions of petitions in committee; in this context, urges the Commission to avoid general answers and to provide targeted and tailored responses to the petitioners and their requests; |
| --- | --- |

21.

| 22. | Calls on civil society as a whole to tap the full potential of the right to petition when it comes to effecting policy and legislative changes at EU level; encourages civil society organisations to make better use of petitions as instruments of direct democracy in order to convey their concerns, as well as possible non-compliance with Union law, to the European institutions; |
| --- | --- |

22.

| 23. | Calls on the Conference on the Future of Europe to reflect and hold a debate on the right to petition, and, along with members of the public, to look at ways to improve knowledge of and access to the right to petition, in order to turn it into a more democratic and useful instrument for citizens and residents in the EU putting them in direct contact with the EU institutions and transmitting their complaints; calls on the Conference on the Future of Europe to provide suggestions to improve the implementation of the right to petition at EU level; |
| --- | --- |

23.

| 24. | Calls for the position of the Committee on Petitions to be strengthened within Parliament and in its interinstitutional relations, as it is the only committee that communicates directly with citizens; emphasises that more staff and resources need to be allocated to the Committee on Petitions, given the extent of its work; |
| --- | --- |

24.

| 25. | Calls on the other committees to contribute in a timely manner to Parliament’s efforts to respond more rapidly and effectively to citizens’ concerns and to take into account, in ongoing legislative work, the issues raised by petitioners; calls on the other committees to take into account the petitions related to their areas of competence in Parliament’s day-to-day legislative activities, and to respond formally and specifically to the expectations raised by citizens’ petitions; |
| --- | --- |

25.

| 26. | Takes the view that the petitions network is a necessary tool in facilitating the follow-up of petitions as part of parliamentary and legislative business, as well as in promoting the exchange of information and best practices among its members, at both technical and political level; believes that this network should enhance dialogue and cooperation with the Commission and other EU institutions; |
| --- | --- |

26.

| 27. | Given that, according to the Guidelines (5), when asked for its opinion, a committee will weigh the importance of the right to petition and its legislative workload before deciding whether or not to give an opinion, and that this rule pre-dates the Lisbon Treaty and reflects an old perception of the importance of petitions in parliamentary work, calls for an update of the Guidelines to provide the Committee on Petitions and other committees with the necessary authority to carry out their work effectively; |
| --- | --- |

27.

| 28. | Calls for a Eurobarometer survey to be carried out to gauge how much EU citizens know about the right to petition the European Parliament, with the aim of collecting data to use as a basis for a strong and accessible awareness-raising campaign; takes the view that regular EU-wide surveys, based on cross-border polls, help raise the European institutions’ awareness of citizens’ concerns; |
| --- | --- |

28.

| 29. | Calls for a common database to be set up between Parliament and the Commission in order to share, in a transparent and cooperative way, information on all the Commission’s follow-up actions taken on petitions, including EU Pilots and infringement procedures, legislative proposals and any other EU act; |
| --- | --- |

29.

| 30. | Calls for more active promotion of the right to petition and of Parliament’s Petitions Web Portal through social media, awareness-raising campaigns and training for journalists, and for the portal to be linked to popular petitions portals used by the public to gain support at EU and national level; |
| --- | --- |

30.

| 31. | Calls on the Council and the Commission to link their websites, and that of the Conference on the Future of Europe, to the Petitions Web Portal, and to promote the portal via their channels, including Commission representations in the Member States, which should be encouraged to cooperate with Parliament’s liaison offices; |
| --- | --- |

31.

| 32. | Calls for the Petitions Web Portal to be improved to make it more visible to the public, more user-friendly, easier and more intuitive to navigate and accessible to all citizens, especially to persons with disabilities; calls for an improved data analysis function in the ePetition database to facilitate the retrieval of previous petitions on the same subject from ePetition; calls for a simplified process for citizens to support a petition submitted via the online portal, which would enable better use to be made of their right to petition; |
| --- | --- |

32.

| 33. | Observes that petitioners do not have real-time access to information on the status of their petitions; calls, therefore, for more information to be made public and available on the Petitions Web Portal, including, for example, the progress of the petition and inquiries launched with other institutions in this regard; calls for greater synergy between the portal and Parliament’s internal database in order to promote greater transparency in the treatment of petitions; |
| --- | --- |

33.

| 34. | Calls for more information to be collected on the profile of petitioners, while ensuring full compliance with data protection rules, in order to identify groups that are under-represented when it comes to exercising the right to petition, and for those groups to be targeted by means of appropriate outreach campaigns; |
| --- | --- |

34.

The function of the European Ombudsman

| 35. | Points out the importance of the right of any EU citizen and any natural or legal person residing in the EU to complain to the European Ombudsman about instances of maladministration within the EU institutions; takes the view that citizens’ complaints to the Ombudsman represent an essential element of participatory democracy and of the legitimacy of the Union’s decision-making process; points out that the right to refer a matter to the Ombudsman increases citizens’ engagement with and trust in the EU institutions, as it promotes transparency and good administration in the EU institutions and bodies; |
| --- | --- |

35.

| 36. | Emphasises the development of the role of the Ombudsman, who can use own-initiative powers to help to tackle systemic problems in EU administration and make efforts to promote good administration, i.e. ensuring the institutions, bodies, offices and agencies of the Union meet the very highest standards; with that in mind, considers the role of the Ombudsman to be more important than ever in view of the fact that the administration of the EU, via its agencies, is taking on an increasingly important role in citizens’ lives when it comes to issues such as the environment, migration and health; |
| --- | --- |

36.

| 37. | Recalls that the European Ombudsman is empowered to make recommendations, proposals for solutions and suggestions for improvement with a view to resolving a problem relating to various cases of maladministration; observes that where a complaint falls outside their mandate, the Ombudsman may advise the complainant to refer it to another authority or to the Committee on Petitions; notes that in 2020 the Ombudsman received more than 1 400 complaints which did not fall within her mandate, mainly because they did not concern activities related to administration at the EU level; |
| --- | --- |

37.

| 38. | Calls on the Ombudsman to look more closely at the manner in which EU funds and the EU budget are spent, and to check that the Union’s interests are not undermined by breaches of the rule of law, any infringement of the EU’s principles and values, corruption or conflicts of interest, especially in the context of Next Generation EU, the European recovery plan; emphasises that respect for the rule of law is an essential condition for access to EU funds; takes the view that this conditionality concerning respect for the rule of law and the fact that the European Union does not compromise on its values are factors that strengthen citizens’ trust in the Union and show the EU’s firm commitment to democratic quality throughout its territory; |
| --- | --- |

38.

| 39. | Recalls that relations with the Ombudsman are one of the responsibilities conferred by Parliament’s Rules of Procedure on the Committee on Petitions; |
| --- | --- |

39.

| 40. | Welcomes the recent changes made to the Statute of the European Ombudsman, which bring the exercise of the Ombudsman’s functions into line with the Lisbon Treaty and will further enhance the right of EU citizens and residents to complain about maladministration, in particular in the areas of whistleblower protection, harassment and conflicts of interest at the EU’s institutions, bodies and agencies; recalls that the Ombudsman’s new Statute also clarifies the conditions under which the Ombudsman may conduct own-initiative enquiries, reiterating that the Ombudsman may cooperate with the authorities of the Member States and with the EU institutions, bodies and agencies; in this context, strongly believes that the Ombudsman should be allocated an increased budget, providing her with the necessary resources to effectively handle the increased workload and to continue to work competently at the service of European citizens; urges the European institutions, bodies and agencies to follow the Ombudsman’s recommendations regarding transparency and other ethical issues; |
| --- | --- |

40.

| 41. | Recalls that EU citizens have the right to access the EU institutions’ documents; congratulates the Ombudsman on the remarkable work she has done on the accessibility of EU documents, in particular the application of the fast-track procedure to deal with such requests; invites the co-legislators to follow the recommendations of the Ombudsman in relation to Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 (6) on public access to documents and to encourage its revision; considers the revision of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 to be a priority, in order to guarantee full transparency and full public access to the documents held by the EU institutions; stresses the importance of the Ombudsman’s transparency-related tasks for European democracy, in particular those concerning the accessibility of documents for European citizens, in order to enable them to fully exercise their right to information and to increase citizens’ confidence in the European project; calls on the Ombudsman to continue her efforts in this direction, because timely access to documents in the EU’s 24 official languages is essential to ensure the proper engagement of citizens and civil society in the decision-making process; |
| --- | --- |

41.

| 42. | Congratulates the Ombudsman for the work done in promoting multilingualism for citizens and for publishing a set of recommendations to the EU administration on the use of official EU languages when communicating with the public, recommendations that give guidance on how and when to communicate in which languages in order to safeguard the EU’s linguistic diversity; |
| --- | --- |

42.

| 43. | Recalls that one of the ways to improve the perception of the EU by citizens is by making it more understandable and transparent to them; considers that the Council should continue work on improving its transparency and invites it to implement some of the recommendations issued repeatedly by Parliament and by the Ombudsman; |
| --- | --- |

43.

| 44. | Considers it very important to continue to properly inform EU citizens about the Ombudsman’s role and the scope of the activities carried out by the Ombudsman, and of the Ombudsman’s influence on the development of the EU institutions; calls on the Ombudsman to continue to disseminate information about the outcomes of inquiries that have resulted in EU trade negotiations becoming more transparent, to make public the results of clinical trials of medicines evaluated in the EU, to set up complaints mechanisms for asylum seekers, and to tighten ethics rules for European Commissioners; |
| --- | --- |

44.

| 45. | Calls on the Ombudsman to further strengthen the European Network of Ombudsmen in order to promote the right to refer matters to an Ombudsman at both national and European level and in order to remain connected with and keep abreast of the national realities of citizens; believes it necessary to step up interactions and exchanges of best practices between national and regional ombudsmen and the European Ombudsman to ensure that citizens are better informed about their rights and have better guidance when making complaints; |
| --- | --- |

45.

The European Citizens’ Initiative

| 46. | Emphasises that the ECI is a unique instrument of participatory democracy and a fundamental tool; stresses that the ECI represents an exceptional opportunity for the citizens of the Union to identify and to put the issues or matters that they are concerned by onto the European political agenda, to articulate their aspirations and to call for the EU to act and legislate, and that its use must be encouraged and supported by all available means; recalls, to that effect, the obligations incumbent on the Commission and the Member States under Regulation (EU) 2019/788, in particular to raise awareness among the citizens of the Union about the existence, objectives and functioning of the ECI, and to provide assistance and practical support to ECI organisers; considers, in this regard, that Parliament’s contribution to the Commission’s communication obligations should be clarified; |
| --- | --- |

46.

| 47. | Calls on the Commission to better engage with the valid ECIs, and remedy the lack of legislative follow-up, so as to achieve the goal of enhancing the democratic legitimacy of the Union through the enhanced participation of citizens in its democratic and political life; believes, therefore, that the Commission should show genuine consideration and commitment to meeting citizens’ expectations in relation to valid ECIs; |
| --- | --- |

47.

| 48. | Recalls that only a few successful ECIs have received adequate follow-up by the Commission; |
| --- | --- |

48.

| 49. | Considers it essential for European democracy that citizens be able to contribute to the exercise of the legislative prerogatives of the Union and be directly involved in the initiation of legislative proposals; calls on the Commission, therefore, to carry out a thorough assessment of the proposals of each valid ECI, and to comply fully with its legal obligation to set out its reasons for taking or not taking action, which it should do in a clear, comprehensible and detailed manner; recalls Parliament’s obligation to assess each valid ECI and the measures taken by the Commission in line with Article 16 of Regulation (EU) 2019/788 and Rule 222(9) of Parliament’s Rules of Procedure, particularly when the Commission fails to put forward any such proposals or fails to implement them; |
| --- | --- |

49.

| 50. | Calls for Parliament’s role to be further enhanced and for its links with civil society organisations to be enhanced with regard to specific valid ECIs and their implementation by the Commission; believes that in the specific cases in which the Commission fails to publish its intentions within the given deadline in accordance with Article 15 of Regulation (EU) 2019/788, or set outs in a communication that it intends not to take action on an ECI which has met the procedural requirements, namely that the initiative respects EU primary law and is not contrary to the values of the Union as set out in Article 2 TEU and the rights enshrined in the Charter, Parliament could decide to follow up on the ECI with a legislative own-initiative report (INL) in accordance with Rule 222 of its Rules of Procedure; urges the Commission to commit to submitting a legislative proposal following Parliament’s adoption of any such INL; believes that if such a case were to occur, the Commission should carry out a thorough re-evaluation of its initial response and thereby fully respect Parliament’s INL; asks that Regulation (EU) 2019/788 be amended to incentivise the Commission to table a proposal for a legal act provided that the ECI submission meets the relevant requirements; |
| --- | --- |

50.

| 51. | Calls on the Commission to clearly inform the public about the division of competences between the Union and the Member States to make sure that ECIs concern subjects and issues that fall within the remit of the Commission’s competences to propose legal acts, as well as to provide practical and timely advice to the organisers on the drafting of ECIs and make adequate use of the possibility to partially register an ECI; emphasises that recent ECIs have called for the EU to take more action, more quickly, particularly in the fields of environmental protection, health, animal welfare and civil and political rights, such as the Minority SafePack and End the Cage Age initiatives which received very large support; reiterates the need, therefore, to apply the broadest possible interpretation to the framework of the Commission’s powers to propose a legal act; |
| --- | --- |

51.

| 52. | Applauds the Commission for having held information seminars and for having organised a European Citizens’ Initiative Week in 2020, which brought together representatives of institutions, members of civil society and organisers of past and current initiatives, with the aim of reflecting on how to improve this instrument; considers, however, that the ECI remains little known; calls on the Commission, therefore, to increase the media visibility of this participatory tool, in accordance with Article 18 of Regulation (EU) 2019/788; |
| --- | --- |

52.

| 53. | Asks the Commission to fully evaluate the temporary measures in Regulation (EU) 2020/1042, with particular regard to the extension of the collection periods and its impact on organisers’ ability to mobilise support for their ECIs, in order to inform, inter alia, the review process of Regulation (EU) 2019/788; considers that if this evaluation results in positive evidence, an extension of these temporary measures could be envisaged for a longer period; |
| --- | --- |

53.

| 54. | Calls on the Commission to improve the ECI tool to make citizens’ participation more accessible, given the low number of ECIs that have ultimately been successful in leading to the initiation of legal acts; in this regard, highlights the measures outlined in Regulation (EU) 2019/788 to improve the way in which the citizens of the Union can exercise their right to support an ECI, and calls for the implementation of these measures to be assessed; calls on the Commission to carry out a thorough assessment of the exercise of this right in its next EU citizenship report and to outline legislative and non-legislative measures which could be introduced to further improve the exercise of this right; |
| --- | --- |

54.

| 55. | Is of the opinion that the way in which official replies by the Commission to successful citizens’ initiatives are formulated may significantly influence how the instrument is evaluated by citizens and that greater effort and more prudent examination is required in the case of each successful initiative to ensure the Commission gives adequate thought to citizens’ proposals; |
| --- | --- |

55.

| 56. | Stresses the need for permanent participatory mechanisms that enable citizens to participate in EU decision-making; |
| --- | --- |

56.

| 57. | Highlights the need to establish a proper follow-up mechanism for unsuccessful ECIs in order to assess citizens’ input seriously and effectively, including redirecting citizens to the Committee on Petitions, as the lack of impact could lead to disengagement; underlines the strengthened role that the Committee on Petitions must play throughout hearing processes; calls on the Commission to collaborate in a timely manner with Parliament after an ECI is deemed valid, to enable Parliament to make full use of the three-month period to organise the public hearing by the relevant committees, and to prepare the plenary debates and resolutions on valid ECIs; insists that the objective of the longer time frame under Regulation (EU) 2019/788 by which the Commission should respond to valid ECIs is fundamental to enable the Commission to take full account of the views and positions on the ECIs expressed during the examination phase and to take the possible options for the proposals for legal acts into due account; |
| --- | --- |

57.

| 58. | Welcomes the Commission’s commitment to improving and strengthening the European Citizens’ Initiative Forum, which is also a legal obligation stemming from Regulation (EU) 2019/788; insists that the forum should provide practical guidance and legal support to the organisers and serve as a capacity-building tool to launch, support and sustain ECIs in the collection phase and promote the ECI as a tool for citizens’ involvement in the democratic life of the Union; |
| --- | --- |

58.

| 59. | Calls on the Conference on the Future of Europe to give a direct voice to the citizens of the Union to discuss the effectiveness of the implementation of the ECI and its current legal framework, and to promote the ECI as a useful tool to enable citizens to participate in the implementation of the public policies of the Union; |
| --- | --- |

59.

| 60. | Emphasises that the Conference on the Future of Europe is an opportunity to better understand the need to participate in the EU agenda and could therefore also be an opportunity to discuss how to improve and enforce the process of public participation; underlines the fact that the conference will bring a fresh impetus to the European discussion on strengthening democracy, in particular with regard to ECIs; calls on the Commission to encourage citizens who make suggestions during the Conference on the Future of Europe that are not included in the Commission’s proposals to use all the instruments at their disposal, including ECIs; |
| --- | --- |

60.

Conclusions

| 61. | Emphasises the role of the three participatory instruments, which is to facilitate and encourage the engagement of citizens and residents of the EU, thereby achieving a concrete direct impact on the EU’s political agenda; calls for the establishment and promotion of a large-scale, one-stop, accessible interinstitutional EU citizens’ website (and application, which should be easy to use) to provide information on all the rights and democratic instruments that enable the public to participate directly in and influence decision-making at EU level; takes the view that such a one-stop platform would not only make citizens more aware of their rights, but also promote complementarity between the different instruments; |
| --- | --- |

61.

| 62. | Stresses that regular information gathering on topics of interest to citizens and recurring issues which are raised in petitions, the European Ombudsman’s enquiries and ECIs would help in finding solutions more quickly, while ensuring the coherence of the EU’s policies for its citizens; |
| --- | --- |

62.

| 63. | Considers it essential to analyse the communication problems between the European institutions and the citizens that cause citizen participation mechanisms to be underused by Europeans; calls for the necessary resources be put in place to disseminate information about the existence and functioning of these tools among the general public; |
| --- | --- |

63.

| 64. | Calls for public awareness of these three participatory instruments to be raised, particularly among young people, to ensure that they become effective and useful tools for democratic participation; emphasises that all the European institutions should maximise their communication efforts at local, regional and national level to ensure that as many citizens as possible know about, and are encouraged to participate and be engaged in the three instruments, namely the ECI, complaints to the European Ombudsman and the right to petition; stresses the importance of providing citizens with assistance, both at European and local level, through the Europe Direct information centres and Houses of Europe (7), in submitting petitions, ECIs and complaints to the European Ombudsman; |
| --- | --- |

64.

| 65. | Underlines the crucial educational role that academic stakeholders must play in providing European civic education; urges the Member States to teach pupils in primary and secondary schools and universities about the EU’s three participatory instruments in order for them to be aware of the EU decision-making process and of how to participate actively; asks the Commission to strengthen the Erasmus+ programme’s targets on young people’s active participation in democratic life, particularly by means of learning activities to develop civic skills and an understanding of European policies; points out that civic engagement among young people is vital for the future of all democracies; |
| --- | --- |

65.

| 66. | Underlines the importance of giving full access to persons with disabilities to all the different instruments that the EU provides to citizens, particularly through systematic interpretation and translation into Sign language and Easy-to-Read language; |
| --- | --- |

66.

| 67. | Calls on the EU institutions to address the challenges faced by vulnerable groups of people who are underrepresented and unable to have their issues addressed, and to involve them in decision-making; |
| --- | --- |

67.

| 68. | Calls on the Commission to include the three participatory instruments in the implementation of the Youth Strategy 2019-2027 ‘Engaging, Connecting and Empowering young people: a new EU Youth Strategy’, in particular under the action areas ‘Engage’ and ‘Connect’; |
| --- | --- |

68.

| 69. | Recalls that the EU’s multilingual communication policy and the publication of information and documents in all the official languages of the EU is a crucial element in communicating with and engaging citizens from all Member States, which needs to be strengthened; highlights its importance in all communication channels, including social media, in order to better connect with citizens, with particular regard to the special needs of persons with disabilities; welcomes the guidelines published by the Ombudsman instructing the institutions on how to develop their language policy in the most citizen-friendly manner; |
| --- | --- |

69.

| 70. | Insists on the need for Parliament to discuss the role and the size of the Committee on Petitions; points out that giving greater consideration to citizen’s demands can only be achieved if a competent body takes charge of the follow-up; highlights that currently the Committee on Petitions is neither large enough nor has sufficient powers to satisfy the demand among citizens for its assistance; |
| --- | --- |

70.

| 71. | Stresses the need to address the shortcomings of the EU petition system, taking into account the special needs of persons with disabilities, in order to ensure its full democratic potential and agenda-setting role; calls for the EU institutions to use their resources to increase the attractiveness of this tool and promote citizens’ participation in EU law-making; in this regard, stresses the need for more EU funding to be allocated to the promotion of the participatory mechanisms; |
| --- | --- |

71.

| 72. | With a view to improving public participation, emphasises the need for citizens to have clear guidance to help them choose the most appropriate participatory tool to respond to their concerns; takes the view that there is a need to understand and overcome the obstacles citizens, particularly Europeans with disabilities, encounter when they are drawing up petitions to Parliament, complaints to the Ombudsman and initiatives for the Commission; |
| --- | --- |

72.

| 73. | Emphasises, furthermore, that where ECIs and petitions have an impact — especially involving mass media coverage or consideration by the Commission or Parliament — they should be examined to pinpoint successful strategies and best practices that could be used as learning tools in the future; |
| --- | --- |

73.

| 74. | Emphasises how important transparency is in the process of dealing with citizens’ initiatives and complaints; calls on the Commission to take the necessary steps to guarantee full transparency; expresses its support for the European Ombudsman’s efforts to make all the EU institutions and bodies much more transparent and accountable to EU citizens; |
| --- | --- |

74.

| 75. | Strongly believes that citizens’ access to the documents of the European institutions is the basis of participatory democracy; stresses, in this regard, the need for the transparency and accountability of the institutions to citizens; |
| --- | --- |

75.

| 76. | Stresses that the debate on the future of the EU should result in the improvement of the instruments for citizens’ participation that will make it possible to achieve a Union which is more democratic, transparent and open to its citizens; |
| --- | --- |

76.

o

o o

| 77. | Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the European Ombudsman, the governments and parliaments of the Member States, and their ombudsmen or similar competent bodies. |
| --- | --- |

77.

---

(1)  OJ L 113, 4.5.1994, p. 15.

(2)  OJ L 130, 17.5.2019, p. 55.

(3)  OJ L 213, 17.7.2020, p. 7.

(4)  Regulation (EU) No 211/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 on the citizens’ initiative (OJ L 65, 11.3.2011, p. 1).

(5)  Conference of Committee Chairs of the European Parliament, Guidelines on the treatment of petitions by the standing committees, 14 July 1998, PE225.233.

(6)  Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (OJ L 145, 31.5.2001, p. 43).

(7)  ‘Maison de l’Europe’ in French, https://www.maisons-europe.eu/

---