REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION

ON THE WORKING OF COMMITTEES DURING 2016

In accordance with Article 10(2) of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers (the ‘Comitology Regulation’), the Commission hereby presents the annual report on the working of committees for 2016.

This report gives an overview of developments in the comitology system in 2016 and a summary of the committees’ activities. It is accompanied by a staff working document containing detailed statistics on the work of the individual committees.

1. Overview of developments in the comitology system in 2016

1.1 General development

As described in the 2013 annnual report , all comitology procedures provided for in the ‘old’ Comitology Decision , with the exception of the regulatory procedure with scrutiny (RPS), were automatically adapted to the new comitology procedures provided for in the Comitology Regulation (Regulation (EU) 182/2011).

In 2016, the comitology committees were therefore operating under the procedures set out in the Comitology Regulation, i.e. advisory (Article 4) and examination (Article 5), as well as under the regulatory procedure with scrutiny (RPS) set out in Article 5a of the Comitology Decision.

The Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making of 13 April 2016 recalls the need to align the regulatory procedure with scrutiny:

"The three institutions acknowledge the need for the alignment of all existing legislation to the legal framework introduced by the Lisbon Treaty, and in particular the need to give high priority to the prompt alignment of all basic acts which still refer to the regulatory procedure with scrutiny. The Commission will propose that latter alignment by the end of 2016."

In line with this commitment, the Commission adopted a new proposal for the alignment of the basic acts providing for the regulatory procedure with scrutiny to delegated and implementing acts. It also adopted a second proposal, dealing specifically with the alignment of basic acts in the field of justice. The interinstitutional negotiations on both files have started in 2017.

In 2016 the Commission reported on the functioning of Regulation 182/2011, five years after its entry into force.

In September 2016 the President of the Commission in his State of the Union address to the European Parliament announced a Commission initiative to enhance the democratic character of the comitology procedure by stating: 'It is not right that when EU countries cannot decide among themselves whether or not to ban the use of glyphosate in herbicides, the Commission is forced by Parliament and Council to take a decision. So we will change those rules – because that is not democracy.'.

As follow up to the President's statement, the Commission adopted on 13 February 2017 a proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers (COM(2017) 85/3).

As of the 1st of July 2016, the Commission started publishing draft implementing acts and draft Regulatory Procedure with Scrutiny acts for a four-week public feedback period. This is an important element in the new transparency approach and comes following the commitment undertaken in the 2015 Better Regulation Communication: "Important implementing acts which are subject to Committee opinion will also be made public for four weeks, allowing stakeholders to submit comments before any vote by Member States in the relevant Committee". Once the feedback received is assessed, the draft act is submitted for the vote of the relevant committee. During the committee meeting the Commission explains how the feedback was taken into account and includes this explanation in the summary record of the meeting (which is publicly available in the Comitology Register).

1.2 Development of case law

With reference to the judgment of the Court of Justice of 1 March 2016 in Case C-440/14, National Iranian Oil Company v Council, which does not directly concern the exercise by the Commission of its implementing powers, but it is important in view of the reasons which justify in certain exceptional cases the granting of implementing powers to the Council.

2. Overview of activities