Debate: Improving the strategic approach to the enforcement of EU Law
Date: THURSDAY, 14 DECEMBER 2023
Speaker: Helena Dalli
Language: EN

Your question centres on the Commission’s strategic approach to enforcing EU law that the Commission announced in its 2016 communication ‘EU law: better results through better application’. This approach has been designed to increase the effectiveness of the Commission’s enforcement actions. Effective and smart enforcement is about preventing breaches from happening in the first place. This is why the Commission has continued to step up its efforts in this regard, for instance, by providing early support to Member States on how to ensure effective implementation of EU law and to identify potential problems at an early stage. Where preventive measures are not sufficient and breaches of law persist, the Commission opens and pursues infringement procedures. In the years 2020 to 2022, the Commission launched over 2 300 infringement procedures, an increase compared to the previous three years. In 2022 alone, the Commission referred a total of 35 cases to the Court of Justice of the EU, and in 17 cases which were launched due to the late transposition of directives, the Commission decided to request the Court to impose financial sanctions against the Member State concerned. Indeed, the Commission’s enforcement policy has evolved over time to ensure that it remains as impactful as possible. Priority has been given to tackling breaches with the highest impact on the everyday lives of people and businesses. The primary purpose of the infringement procedure is to ensure that the Member States give effect to EU law in the general interest. This means that where there are sufficient indications of a general practice or systemic failure, the Commission will pursue the infringement. This includes cases based on individual complaints, but the infringement procedure is not designed to offer concrete solutions for individuals or to ensure individual redress. An individual case of misapplication of EU law, where there are insufficient indications of a general practice or systemic failure of compliance with EU law, is best dealt with by redress mechanisms at national level, closer to the citizen. These include, for instance, national courts, regulatory bodies, or ombuds. They often allow for quicker and more tailor-made solutions. The problem has a cross-border dimension. The Solvit network may offer quick remedies. The Commission values the input received from complainants and petitioners on individual cases of misapplication of EU law. If not followed up with specific investigations, they feed into the Commission’s more global monitoring activities. And indeed, when such complaints become repetitive, they may form the basis for inquiries and investigations into potentially more structural and systemic failures. I stress that the Commission invites complainants to refer a matter again to the Commission, should there be additional evidence that points to a systemic failure. Most importantly, if there is no alternative redress mechanism available, the Commission continues to investigate the individual complaint or petition. It is ultimately the Court of Justice that is responsible for deciding on compliance of Member States’ laws with EU law. The hurdle for the Commission is high. To prove a systemic or structural breach of EU law, the Commission must produce sufficient evidence to show that the Member State’s authorities have developed a repeated, widespread and persistent practice which is contrary to EU law. This is why the Commission cannot rely on simple presumptions or anecdotal indications. It must provide concrete evidence that the Member State concerned has generally and persistently failed to fulfil its obligations under EU law. Therefore, an accumulation of individual cases is not on its own necessarily sufficient to prove a systemic nature of a breach. As regards the use of IT tools and transparency, the Commission uses dedicated and collaborative IT tools to handle petitions and complaints concerning an alleged breach of EU law. They make it possible to link existing complaints and petitions concerning the same grievances. This ensures that all relevant information is available to the Commission to conduct the assessment. Furthermore, to help the wider public engage in the shared responsibility on enforcement, the Commission has stepped up transparency of its enforcement actions in recent years. Good examples are an up-to-date public register on all infringement cases, and the annual report on monitoring the application of EU law. The Commission also publishes press releases on all main infringement decisions. The Commission’s 2022 communication ‘Enforcing EU law for a Europe that delivers’ sets out the main tools at the Commission’s disposal to achieve compliance with EU law. More importantly, it set out the concrete benefits the Commission’s actions bring to people and businesses. Numerous examples in the fields of environment, consumer protection and single market, among others, show that the Commission’s strategic approach works, but there is no time to be complacent. The enforcement of EU law is an ongoing task and, at times, challenging. To ensure that the way the Commission enforces EU law is also future-proof, over the last year, the Commission conducted a stocktaking exercise on its working methods for monitoring the application of EU law. This led, in July 2023, to targeted recommendations, which are currently being implemented by the Commission, where appropriate, together with the Member States. Further strengthening transparency on the Commission’s enforcement actions is one of the recommended improvements, notably by publishing information in a more user-friendly and meaningful way. In all these efforts, the Commission pursues one overall objective, namely, to achieve compliance as soon as possible and to ensure that citizens and businesses enjoy the benefits of EU law wherever they live in the EU.