Report from the Commission on the working of Committees during 2006 {SEC(2007) 1713}
Date: 2007-12-20
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: European Commission, activity report, comitology, committee (EU), institutional reform, legislative-executive relations, powers of the institutions (EU)

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 20.12.2007 
COM(2007) 842 final 

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION 

ON THE WORKING OF COMMITTEES DURING 2006 

{SEC(2007) 1713} 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
 
In  accordance  with  Article  7(4)  of  Council  Decision  1999/468/EC  of  28  June  1999,  the 
Commission  hereby  presents  the  annual  report  on  the  working  of  committees  for  2006.  It 
contains  general  comments  on  the  development  of  the  comitology  system,  a  horizontal 
overview  of  committees’  activities  and  an  Annex  with  detailed  statistics  regarding  the 
individual  comitology  committees,  arranged  according  to  the  different  departments  of  the 
Commission.1 The Annex also provides textual comments on changes regarding the number 
of  committees  and  on  exceptional  events  relating  to  specific  draft  measures,  such  as 
unfavourable opinions and referrals to the Council.  

1. 

GENERAL COMMENTS ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE COMITOLOGY SYSTEM  

1.1. 

Reform of the Comitology Procedure 

Council Decision 2006/512/EC amending Council Decision 1999/468/EC was adopted on 17 
July 2006.2 It entered into force on 23 July 2006. 

The  amendment  to  Council  Decision  1999/468/EC  is  intended  to  meet  the  longstanding 
requests  by  the  European  Parliament  to  improve  its  rights  to  scrutinise  implementation  of 
legislative  acts  adopted  under  the  co-decision  procedure.  The  amendment  introduces  a 
“regulatory procedure with scrutiny” (hereafter: “PRAC”). This new procedure is set out in a 
new  Article  5a.  It  is  added  to  the  existing  procedures  (advisory,  management,  regulatory, 
safeguard).  

1.1.1. 

Scope of the PRAC 

The  scope  of  the  PRAC  is  defined  in  the  new  paragraph  2  added  to  Article  2.  Two 
requirements  have  to  be  met:  the  basic  legal  act  has  to  be  adopted  under  the  co-decision 
procedure and must confer powers on the Commission to adopt “measures of general scope 
designed  to  amend  non-essential  elements  of  the  basic  legal  act,  inter  alia  by  (…) 
supplementing  the  instrument  by  the  addition  of  new  non-essential  elements”  (these 
implementing measures will be hereunder referred to as “quasi-legislative measures”). 

The  quasi-legislative  measures  falling  under  the  definition  set  out  above  are  measures  of 
general  scope  (as  opposed  to  individual  measures  addressed  to  specifically  designated 
operators/Member States) that:  

–  formally amend (an article or annex of) a co-decision basic act; for instance, measures of 
general  scope  to  adapt  technical  annexes  of  a  co-decision  basic  act  to  scientific  progress 
would qualify as “quasi legislative” measures;  

or 

–  supplement the co-decision basic act by creating a new set of rules (as opposed to merely 
applying  criteria  set  out  in  the  basic  act);  for  instance,  in  the  financial  services  area,  the 
measures  adding  details  to  the  information  to  be  contained  in  prospectuses  would  also 
qualify. 

1 The Annex is presented as a separate Commission staff working paper. 
2  OJ  L  200,  22.7.2006,  p.  11.  A  consolidated  version  of  the  Comitology  Decision  is  published  in  OJ  C  255, 

21.10.2006, p.4. 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
                                                 
1.1.2.  Procedure 

The steps of the PRAC are defined in the new Article 5a. It gives both legislative arms, the 
European  Parliament  and  the  Council,  a  right  of  control  over  the  substance  of  draft 
implementing measures. This right goes far beyond the European Parliament’s existing “right 
of  scrutiny”  (“droit  de  regard”)  under  Article  8,  which  is  limited  to  checking  that  the 
Commission  did  not  exceed  the  implementing  powers  conferred  on  it  by  the  basic  act  (and 
provides for the adoption of a non-binding resolution by the European Parliament). 

Like  the  current  regulatory  procedure,  the  new  PRAC  draws  a  distinction  between  two 
situations. When the committee delivers a favourable opinion, the Commission shall submit 
without  delay  the  draft  measures  for  scrutiny  (control)  by  the  European  Parliament  and  the 
Council.  If  the  European  Parliament  and  the  Council  do  not  oppose  the  draft  measure,  the 
Commission  adopts  it  after  a  three-month  period  expires  (Article  5a  (3)  (d)).  Within  that 
period,  the  European  Parliament  (by  a  majority  of  its  members)  and/or  the  Council  (by 
qualified majority) may oppose adoption of the draft measure on different types of grounds.  

The  Commission  may  then  submit  an  amended  draft  of  the  measures  to  the  committee  or 
present a legislative proposal in accordance with the Treaty (Article 5a (3) (c)).  

–  If  the  committee  gives  an  unfavourable  opinion  or  no  opinion,  the  Commission  shall 
submit a proposal to the Council without delay and forward it to the European Parliament 
(Article 5a (4) (a)). Consequently, the Council has the “first say” - within a period of two 
months  -  on  the  envisaged  measures.  The  Council  can  oppose  the  proposed  measures  or 
envisage adopting the measures by a qualified majority and in that case shall without delay 
submit  the  measures  to  the  European  Parliament.  If  the  Council  does  not  act  within  the 
two-month  period,  the  Commission  shall  without  delay  submit  the  measures  for  scrutiny 
(control) by the European Parliament. 

–  In the second stage the European Parliament has the right to oppose the proposed measure. 
If  it  does  not  oppose,  the  measures  shall  be  adopted  by  the  Council  (if  the  Council 
envisaged  adopting  the  measures)  or  by  the  Commission  (if  the  Council  did  not  react 
within the two-month period). 

1.2. 

Implementation of the reform 

1.2.1.  Alignment 

Alignment of existing basic acts with new Comitology procedures is a familiar exercise, as it 
has  been  carried  out  before  for  Council  Decision  1999/468/EC.  The  four  alignment 
regulations adopted in 20033 amended all existing basic legal acts, one by one, but only their 
Comitology  procedures,  without  any  other  changes  to  their  substance.  The  alignment 
consisted  then  in  eliminating  the  variants  for  each  procedure  (management,  regulatory  and 
safeguard).  Consequently,  they  were  purely  automatic,  which  facilitated  approval  by  the 
legislator.  

3 

Council Regulation (EC) No 806/2003 of 14 April 2003, Council Regulation (EC) No 807/2003 of 14 
April  2003,  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  1105/2003  of  26  May  2003  and  Regulation  (EC)  No 
1882/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 September 2003. 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
                                                 
By contrast, the criteria set out above (see point 1.1.1 above) are mandatory. This means that 
whenever  the  conditions  apply,  the  PRAC  has  to  be  foreseen.  Otherwise  the  legal  basic  act 
adopted is illegal. Therefore, each case must be examined on its own merits to decide whether 
the conditions are fulfilled for the new procedure to apply. 

In a joint statement4, the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission agreed on a 
list  of  basic  legal  acts  that  must  be  urgently  brought  into  line  with  the  PRAC.  The  26 
corresponding  proposals  for  this  priority  alignment  were  adopted  by  the  Commission  on  22 
December 2006.  

All other basic legal acts adopted under the co-decision procedure which are not listed in the 
joint  statement  of  July  2006  also  have  to  be  aligned.  The  Commission  has  committed  to 
reviewing all existing legal acts and, whenever necessary, to make relevant proposals for their 
alignment before the end of 2007.  

1.2.2.  Revision of the bilateral agreement 

The October 2000 bilateral (Commission/European Parliament) agreement on procedures for 
implementing  the  Comitology  Decision  has  to  be  revised  to  be  brought  into  line  with  the 
statement on transparency/updated register, the new regulatory procedure with scrutiny and, 
whenever  possible,  to  streamline  current  arrangements.  The  revision  of  this  agreement  is 
foreseen before the end of 2007. 

1.2.3.  Comitology and transparency: the register and repository for comitology documents 

In  a  statement  regarding  Article  7(3)  of  Council  Decision  1999/468/EC  (transparency 
statement)5,  the  Commission  commits  itself  to  improving  the  functions  of  the  Comitology 
Register in order to help the European Parliament follow the different stages and timetable of 
each comitology procedure better and to distinguish between the various types of documents 
received. 

Therefore, as an accompanying measure to the reform of Council Decision 1999/468/EC, the 
Commission  is  currently  working  on  further  improvements  to  the  register  to  give  the 
European  Parliament  and  the  general  public  more  transparent  and  coherent  access  to  the 
documents  contained  in  the  repository.  The  deployment  of  the  upgrade  is  foreseen  to  take 
place in the beginning of 2008. 

1.3. 

Development of Case Law 

By its application brought on 5 March 2004, the Commission asked the Court to annul Article 
17(2) of Regulation (EC) No 2152/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 
November  2003  concerning  monitoring  of  forests  and  environmental  interactions  in  the 
Community  (Forest  Focus  Regulation),  in  so  far  as  it  makes  the  adoption  of  implementing 
measures  for  the  Forest  Focus  programme  subject  to  the  regulatory  procedure  laid  down  in 
Article  5  of  Council  Decision  1999/468/EC  (Comitology  Decision).  According  to  the 
Commission, the implementing measures to be taken pursuant to the Forest Focus Regulation 
were management measures for an action programme. For the implementation of Community 

4 
5 

OJ C 255, 21.10.2006, p. 1. 
OJ C 171, 22.7.2006, p. 21. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
programmes only the management procedure or, as appropriate, the consultative procedure is, 
in principle, applicable. 

In  its  Judgment  of  23  February  2006  (Case  C-122/04  –  Commission  v.  Council  and 
Parliament), the Court underlined as a matter of principle that although the criteria laid down 
in  Article  2  of  the  Comitology  Decision  are  not  binding,  where  the  Community  legislature 
departs from those criteria in the choice of a committee procedure, it must give reasons for its 
choice. However, in the present case, the Court considered that the choice of the Community 
legislature coincides with the criteria laid down in Article 2(b) of the Comitology Decision. 

The  Court  stated  in  particular  that  the  Council  had  justified  grounds  to  reason  that  certain 
elements  of  the  Forest  Focus  scheme  could  be  qualified  as  essential  and  were  not  yet 
sufficiently  developed  by  the  Forest  Focus  Regulation  in  order  to  be  considered  as 
management measures relating to the implementation of programmes. Thus, the management 
procedure was found inappropriate. Therefore the choice of regulatory procedure was made in 
conformity with the Comitology Decision. 

Consequently, the Commission’s application was dismissed. 

1.4. 

Enlargement 

On 25 April 2005, the Accession Treaty with Bulgaria and Romania was signed. Similar to 
the  approach  for  the  ten  new  Member  States  during  the  period  preceding  their  accession  in 
May 2004, Bulgaria and Romania were granted active observer status as from 26 April 2005 
and  were  able  to  participate  in  committee  meetings  as  active  observers  until  both  countries 
joined the European Union on 1 January 2007. For the remaining candidate countries Turkey 
and  Croatia,  and  since  December  2005,  also  the  Former  Yugoslav  Republic  of  Macedonia, 
participation  continues  to  be  organised  on  the  basis  of  the  “Communication  from  the 
Commission  to  the  Council  on  the  participation  of  candidate  countries  in  Community 
programmes, agencies and committees”.6  

2. 

HORIZONTAL OVERVIEW OF ACTIVITIES 

2.1 

Number of committees  

It is important to distinguish between the comitology committees, on the one hand, and other 
entities,  in  particular  “expert  groups”  created  by  the  Commission  itself,  on  the  other.  The 
latter  are  concerned  with  preparing  and  implementing  policy,  whereas  the  comitology 
committees are involved in the context of implementing legislative acts. This report focuses 
exclusively on comitology committees. The number of comitology committees was calculated 
by sector of activity (Table I) as at 31.12.2006. The figures for the previous year (status as at 
31.12.2005) are given for comparison. 

6 COM(1999)710 final, adopted 20.12.1999. See also the “Communication from the Commission to the Council 
and  Parliament  on  preparing  for  the  participation  of  the  Western  Balkan  countries  in  Community 
programmes and agencies” (COM (2003) 748 final, adopted 3.12.2003). 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
TABLE I – TOTAL NUMBER OF COMMITTEES 

Policy Sector  

Enterprise and Industry (ENTR) 

Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities (EMPL) 

Agriculture and Rural Development (AGRI) 

Transport and Energy (TREN) 

Environment (ENV) 

Research (RTD) 

Information Society and Media (INFSO) 

Fisheries and Maritime Affairs (FISH) 

Internal Market (MARKT) 

Regional Policy (REGIO) 

Taxation and Customs Union (TAXUD) 

Education and Culture (EAC) 

Health and Consumer Protection (SANCO) 

Justice, Liberty and Security (JLS) 

External Relations (RELEX) 

Trade (TRADE) 

Enlargement (ELARG) 

EuropeAid (AIDCO) 

Humanitarian Aid (ECHO) 

Statistics (ESTAT) 

Budget (BUDG) 

Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) 

TOTAL 

2005 

2006 

32 

6 

31 

38 

32 

3 

10 

3 

10 

2 

10 

7 

15 

13 

3 

12 

3 

8 

1 

8 

2 

1 

33 

8 

30 

36 

35 

3 

12 

4 

13 

3 

10 

12 

16 

15 

4 

12 

4 

15 

1 

8 

2 

1 

250 

277 

2.2 

Number of opinions and implementing measures 

As  in  previous  reports,  this  report  gives  global  figures  on  formal  opinions  delivered  by  the 
committees7  and  the  subsequent  implementing  measures  (=  legal  acts,  administrative  and 
financing  decisions)  adopted  by  the  Commission.  These  figures  describe  the  concrete 
“output”  of  the  committees  (Table  IV).  The  total  number  of  opinions  delivered  by  the 
committees in 2006 was 2 933 (compared with 2 582 in 2005); the number of implementing 
measures adopted by the Commission was 2 862 (compared with 2 654 in 2005).  

TABLE IV – NUMBER OF OPINIONS AND IMPLEMENTING MEASURES (2006) 

Opinions 

Implementing 
measures 

Opinions 

Implementing 
measures 

ENTR 

EMPL 

74 

18 

10 

1 

EAC 

SANCO 

61 

340 

61 

328 

7  Including  favourable  and  unfavourable  opinions,  following  a  formal  vote  in  the  case  of  regulatory  and 
management procedures. Cases of “no opinions” (or “absence of opinions”), i.e., where a formal vote 
took place but the necessary (qualified) majority was not reached, are not included in the figures. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
 
 
                                                 
AGRI 

TREN  

ENV 

RTD 

INFSO 

FISH 

MARKT 

REGIO 

TAXUD 

1 576 

1 576 

JLS 

61 

55 

212 

74 

19 

10 

9 

50 

44 

42 

RELEX 

TRADE 

212 

ELARG 

74 

19 

8 

2 

AIDCO  

ECHO 

ESTAT 

BUDG 

42 

OLAF 

56 

2 

6 

74 

297 

45 

19 

1 

2 

38 

4 

5 

75 

297 

45 

13 

1 

4 

The large number of implementing measures adopted in certain policy sectors – Agriculture 
(1  576),  Health  and  Consumer  Protection  (328),  EuropeAid  (297),  Research  (212)  and 
Information Society (73) – again reflects the intensity of work delegated to the Commission in 
these  areas  via  the  comitology  procedures.8  When  compared  with  the  previous  year,  a 
significant  increase  can  be  noted  for  EuropeAid  (124  implementing  measures  in  2005), 
whereas a decrease can be noted in the sector of Enterprise and  Industry (10 implementing 
measures  in  2006,  compared  with  55  in  2005)  and  of  Taxation  and  Customs  Union  (7 
implementing measures in 2006, compared with 47 in 2005). 

8 It has to be noted that the sheer number of measures adopted as such does not indicate the political, economic or 

financial importance of the decisions taken. 

EN 

7 

   EN