Uusimmat asiakirjat

Yhteenveto : This study examines the future deployment of Automated Vehicles in the European Union through an analysis combining technological assessment, scenario development, and policy evaluation. Building on recent advances in Artificial Intelligence, Software-Defined Vehicles, and Intelligent Infrastructure, the study develops three scenarios – European Leadership, Selective Strengths and Dependencies, and External Dependence – to explore how Europe's regulatory and industrial position might evolve. These scenarios serve as a framework for assessing policy options related to legislation, deployment, and EU support for research and development.

Ulkopuolinen laatija : Botsch, Michael; Huber, Werner

Yhteenveto : This briefing presents a comparative assessment of the European Parliament’s resolution with recommendations to the European Commission on the 28th regime, adopted on 20 January 2026; and the European Commission's proposal for a 28th regime corporate legal framework presented on 18 March 2026. While the two institutions are well aligned on the broad objectives of the initiative, there are notable divergences in the proposed measures. First, the scope of eligible companies following the Commission's proposal is broad without ensuring a clear and consistent definition across the EU. Although all limited liability companies – including publicly listed entities – would be eligible for registration as 28th regime companies, only a subset would qualify for a 'simplified procedure' in the event of insolvency, on the basis of criteria to be determined at Member State level. Second, the proposed 'dual-track' digital registration system would accommodate only a limited range of actions. Third, the Commission proposal does not provide for the establishment of a specialised dispute resolution mechanism. While seeking to address the fragmentation of corporate legal frameworks in the European Union, the Commission proposal could potentially introduce new sources of fragmentation with detrimental impacts for innovative companies – through a more uneven and less predictable business environment across the EU – and for investors, through reduced access to comprehensive, centralised information and lower legal certainty. The European added value of the Commission's proposal could be limited by these impacts, which could hinder cross-border investment and the scale-up of innovative companies in the EU.

Esittäjät : HALLAK ISSAM, FERNANDES MEENAKSHI

Esittäjät : SANDERSKI ANDRZEJ, CROSSFIELD CLARE BABETTE, SERPIERI Margherita

Esittäjät : SANDERSKI ANDRZEJ, SERPIERI Margherita

Yhteenveto : This workshop was organised by the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Justice, Civil Liberties and Institutional Affairs at the request of the Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI), following the initiative of the EP Coordinator on Children’s Rights. It marked the 45th anniversary of the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. Experts presented evidence from global statistical studies, EU practice and mediation casework to assess how the Convention operates, the challenges arising from differing national approaches, and the influence of domestic violence and child participation on return proceedings. The discussion identified evidence-based measures to improve implementation, strengthen judicial cooperation and support child-friendly procedures.

Esittäjät : MARGELI CHRISTINA, MACIEJEWSKA JAGODA KAROLINA

Yhteenveto : The 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention recently celebrated the 45th anniversary of its signing on 25 October 1980. This in-depth analysis considers its successes and the challenges it faces, what we have learned so far, and what may be realistically achieved in its future operation, to ensure that it maintains its critical support and relevance for the contemporary global community it serves. The European Parliament’s current and potential role in this exercise is considered as part of this in-depth analysis. This in-depth analysis was commissioned by the Policy Department for Justice, Civil Liberties and Institutional Affairs at the request of the JURI Committee.

Ulkopuolinen laatija : Marilyn FREEMAN

Yhteenveto : This study, commissioned by the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Justice, Civil Liberties and Institutional Affairs at the request of the Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI), examines the added value that the Brussels IIb Regulation and the 1996 Hague Convention bring to the 1980 Hague Convention. This enhanced framework enables 26 EU Member States to ensure the prompt return of abducted children while protecting their best interests, and its further improvement calls for continued joint efforts at both European and international level. The 1980 Hague Convention The main differences and the added value of the Brussels IIb Regulation and the interplay with the1996 Hague Convention

Ulkopuolinen laatija : Boriana MUSSEVA

Yhteenveto : The European Commission drew up seven impact assessments (IAs) in support of 18 programme proposals for the 2028-2034 multiannual financial framework (MFF) and the proposed regulation on a horizontal performance framework. The broad scope of these IAs does not allow individual programme proposals to be assessed in any detail – as is particularly salient in the case of the IA on the national and regional partnership plans, covering nine legislative proposals. All IAs acknowledge a deviation from the scope and depth of a standard IA as defined by the Better Regulation Guidelines (BRG). This is justified with Tool #9 of the BR Toolbox, which indicates the specificity of the MFF, but does not define how related IAs should be carried out. As a result, the application of the better regulation principles varies widely across the MFF IAs. They are similar insofar as the Commission chose for all of them a mostly horizontal rather than policy-specific approach and did not include any budgetary considerations and scenarios. These choices affect the quality of key sections of the IAs considerably, albeit to varying extents. The problem definition often lacks specificity and substantiation. Similarly, the IAs' objectives remain largely unspecific, which, in turn, affects the IAs' monitoring and evaluation provisions and risks hampering the future measuring of the objectives' achievement. The description of policy options is in most cases short and vague, which weakens the impact analysis. The depth to which economic, social and environmental impacts are assessed varies across the sampled IAs. The analysis remains predominantly qualitative, with quantification largely lacking. All seven MFF initiatives are deemed relevant for small and medium-sized enterprises (SME) and are thus listed in the 'SME filter'. The IAs state that they place great emphasis on simplification and burden reduction. None of them is accompanied by a subsidiarity grid, and they discuss subsidiarity, European added value and proportionality rather briefly. While the IAs differ considerably in terms of quality and transparency when it comes to their evidence base and methodology, all of them acknowledge certain limitations and a lack of data (notably quantitative data). Consultation activities were largely limited to open public consultations. The Regulatory Scrutiny Board (RSB) found significant shortcomings in all seven draft IAs, prompting it, exceptionally, to issue opinions without qualification. The persisting flaws in the final IAs suggest that the RSB recommendations have at best been partially addressed. Altogether, the limited quality of the MFF IAs appears to reflect a missed opportunity to provide policymakers with high-quality and transparent evidence for one of the most important policy packages to be negotiated in the coming months and years.

Esittäjät : ANGLMAYER Irmgard, KRAMER Esther

Yhteenveto : Cross-border parental child abductions in the EU are governed by The 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction and (except for Denmark) the Brussels II-ter Regulation. Countries outside of the EU may or may not be Contracting States to ‘the Convention’, but will not be bound by Brussels II-ter. Research has found that the often negative, long-lasting impact of abduction may continue throughout the lifecycle of those who have been abducted. It may also affect future generations of society. This means that every effort to deter abduction should be made. Where that is not possible, the 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention should be nurtured to support its application in contemporary society. Specialist mediation should be encouraged in relation to international child abduction generally, and specifically in relation to Third Countries which are not Contracting States to ‘the Convention’. This study was commissioned by the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs at the request of the JURI Committee.

Ulkopuolinen laatija : Marilyn FREEMAN

Yhteenveto : This in-depth analysis, commissioned by the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Justice, Civil Liberties and Institutional Affairs at the request of the Committee on Legal Affairs, examines how copyright policy should respond to artificial intelligence (AI). It combines historical lessons from digital markets, insight on the economic value of data, and a formal model to study welfare effects. It assesses economic effects of various policy options, including an exception, an exception with opt-out, licencing market (“opt-out”) and statutory licencing, in a search for optimal policy.

Ulkopuolinen laatija : Christian PEUKERT

Yhteenveto : On 21 October 2025, the European Commission under Ursula von der Leyen's second mandate adopted its work programme for 2026 (2026 CWP). In line with the Commission President's political guidelines and letter of intent and highlighting the need for full implementation of Mario Draghi's competitiveness report, the 2026 CWP places a strong emphasis on competitiveness, innovation and collective security. In parallel, the Commission commits to advancing simplification, implementation, and this year, also to strengthening enforcement. These three areas will remain key horizontal priorities for the entire Commission mandate. Just like last year's CWP, the 2026 CWP adheres to the seven headline ambitions put forward in the political guidelines. It is accompanied by a report on implementation, simplification and enforcement, the first of its kind. This new annual report is set to replace the annual burden survey. Annex I of the 2026 CWP puts forward 70 major new legislative and non-legislative initiatives, 44 % of which fall under the competitiveness headline ambition. (Up to) 48 of the new initiatives are legislative, including three sector-specific omnibus packages (on energy product legislation, taxation and citizens). Of the forthcoming legislative initiatives, 67 % are likely revisions of existing legislation, while more than half have a strong simplification dimension. Unlike previous CWPs, the 2026 CWP does not indicate whether a legislative initiative will be accompanied by an impact assessment; this lack of transparency runs counter to the spirit of the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making. Information on the Commission's 'Have your say' portal shows that, at the time of writing, two thirds of the up to 48 legislative initiatives were expected to be accompanied by an impact assessment (though the final number may be higher). The annual evaluation plan presented in Annex II of the CWP, comprising 20 evaluations, does not appear exhaustive. Finally, the communication on Better Regulation, expected in Q2 2026, may entail a revision of the Better Regulation Guidelines, the first since 2021.

Esittäjät : ANGLMAYER Irmgard, DALLI HUBERT, IOANNIDES Isabelle

Yhteenveto : The IA underpins the proposals establishing the AgoraEU, Erasmus+ and Justice programmes (2028-2034). It refers to Better Regulation Tool #9 which acknowledges that 'the special case of preparing a new MFF is a unique process requiring a specific approach as regards scope and depth of analysis'. In addition, it explains that, as 'the structure of the next MFF will significantly differ from the current one, budget assumptions for each programme are unreliable at this stage', and the assessment is therefore only qualitative. Following the 'evaluate first' principle, the IA identifies the problems and their drivers, and provides some estimates of the scale of the problems. Furthermore, it analyses the problem drivers' possible development, taking into account megatrends as well. The IA assesses the expected social, economic and environmental impacts of the policy options, and compares them against effectiveness, efficiency, coherence and proportionality. It explains the methods used, in particular the social multi criteria evaluation model and underlying methodology, and openly mentions the limitations in the analysis, such as the qualitative analysis of costs and benefits. The description of the options would have benefited from more detailed explanations, as it is not quite clear what kind of measures each option would comprise. A more comprehensive description would have made it easier to follow the impact analysis and comparison of options. Furthermore, the IA could have clarified how widely different stakeholder groups support the preferred option, as this does not clearly appear in the stakeholder consultation summary. As the initiative is relevant for SMEs, a dedicated analysis (SME test) was carried out. The IA also provides a competitiveness assessment. In line with the youth check approach, the IA discusses the initiative's relevance to young people and their feedback in the consultation. The Regulatory Scrutiny Board decided to issue an opinion without qualification due to the lack of several key elements in the draft IA. The revised IA appears to have made an effort to improve the quality of the assessment; however, not all of the RSB’s points were addressed.

Esittäjät : TUOMINEN ULLA-MARI

Yhteenveto : Quantum technologies are developing rapidly. They have extensive uses in secure communications, energy, healthcare, manufacturing, defence and security, and space, and may bring about a change of paradigm in technological capabilities. Their economic and strategic value makes them a high priority for EU strategic autonomy. The new Quantum Europe Strategy intends to establish the EU as a global leader in quantum technologies by 2030. This paper explores the potential paths the EU can take to establish itself as a global leader in this field. To ensure that the strategy holds in a highly unpredictable world, we have conducted a foresight exercise to 'wind-tunnel' (stress-test) statements taken from the quantum strategy against the European Commission Joint Research Centre's four reference foresight scenarios.

Esittäjät : PATAKI Gabor Zsolt

Yhteenveto : On 8 October 2025, the European Commission published its new LGBTIQ+ equality strategy for the period 2026 to 2030. According to the Commission, this strategy seeks to build on the ambition and achievements of the 2020-2025 equality strategy and is part of the EU's effort to build a Union where 'diversity is celebrated as part of our collective richness, where all people can be themselves without risk of discrimination, exclusion or violence'. While data from the EU's Fundamental Rights Agency show that LGBTIQ people's social acceptance has steadily increased across the EU, there is also evidence that discrimination, hate and violence against LGBTIQ communities not only persist but have reached a new high. Based on a comparative analysis, it appears that, overall, the Commission has followed up on most of its key actions proposed in the 2020-2025 strategy. By adopting a new LGBTIQ equality strategy for the period 2026 to 2030 and re-appointing an Equality Commissioner, the Commission met two key demands of stakeholders, including the European Parliament. Compared with the previous 2020-2025 strategy, the 16 key actions proposed under the new strategy concern mostly non-legislative and support measures. The Commission has proposed to more than double the funding for LGBTIQ support under the next multiannual financial framework. Consistent implementation and enforcement will be essential. This holds true for both the Commission and the Member States, particularly where the rule of law is under threat.

Esittäjät : EISELE Katharina, DE GROOT DAVID ARMAND JACQUES GERA

Yhteenveto : Based on practices from the EU Member States and beyond, academics highlighted practical solutions for improving legal clarity, structure and usability without requiring major legislative reform. The event further demonstrated the value of structural innovation and linguistic adaptation in closing the gap between legislation and citizens.

Esittäjät : IVANOVA TSVETELINA VENTSISLAVOVA

Yhteenveto : This study was commissioned by the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Justice, Civil Liberties and Institutional Affairs at the request of the Legal Affairs Committee (JURI). It analyses the areas where the Commission’s 2023 Annual Report on Monitoring the Application of EU law, the Draghi and the Letta reports overlap: namely, climate action, sustainable finance, and the digital economy. The paper argues that the implementation of EU law encounters distinct challenges across these domains and concludes with recommendations to EU institutions aimed at improving implementation.

Ulkopuolinen laatija : Maurizia DE BELLIS

Yhteenveto : This in-depth analysis was commissioned by the European Parliament's Policy Department for Justice, Civil Liberties and Institutional Affairs at the request of the Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI). It assesses the Commission's 2023 Annual Report on monitoring the application of EU law and examines whether there is room for improvement. It concludes that the Report does not provide a complete and transparent picture of EU law enforcement. It develops specific recommendations on what demands the European Parliament could make of the Commission in order to improve both enforcement and reporting.

Ulkopuolinen laatija : Mary-Rose McGUIRE and Hans SCHULTE-NÖLKE

Yhteenveto : This report, commissioned by the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Justice, Civil Liberties and Institutional Affairs at the request of the Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI), examines the use of AI techniques to support monitoring the application of EU Law. First an overview is provided of the state-of-the-art AI solutions used in application of law. Then AI applications in the legislative process are considered, from pre-enactment information analysis, impact forecasting and public engagement, to drafting support and monitoring impacts and compliance. AI in monitoring the implementation of EU law is then analysed, considering both existing applications and prospects for new AI technologies. First the transposition of directives is considered. The application of binding provisions is then addressed, having regard to implementing rules, judicial decisions, administrative action, and social behaviour. Finally potential contributions of AI to a principled approach to EU law is examined, for consistent interpretation and the respect of fundamental rights and principles. Recommendations are finally proposed on using AI to make monitoring more accurate and efficient.).

Ulkopuolinen laatija : Giovanni SARTOR

Yhteenveto : This study, commissioned by the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs at the request of the Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI), exposes the adverse effect of legislative complexity to the application of EU law, and advocates the reform of the monitoring of the application of EU law to embrace a qualitative, in depth evaluation of complexity, as a contributor of legislative effectiveness of EU Acts and implementing measures for all three legislative audiences (citizens, Member States and national authorities, and EU institutions).

Ulkopuolinen laatija : Prof. Dr Helen XANTHAKI

Esittäjät : SANDERSKI ANDRZEJ, SERPIERI Margherita

Yhteenveto : The JURI Committee workshop on monitoring the application of EU law was held on July 15, 2025. It brought together academic experts to explore how the effectiveness of EU law implementation can be assessed and improved. Prof. Dr Helen Xanthaki addressed the quality of legislative drafting and its impact on enforcement. Prof. Dr Sara Drake presented a citizen-centred approach to monitoring. Prof. Dr Hans Schulte-Nölke and Prof. Dr Mary-Rose McGuire jointly analysed the European Commission’s 2023 Annual Report, highlighting shortcomings in transparency and enforcement and proposing improvements in private law monitoring. Prof. Dr Maurizia De Bellis examined enforcement in key policy areas identified by the Letta and Draghi reports. Finally, Prof. Dr Giovanni Sartor discussed how AI tools could support compliance tracking. The workshop provided an interdisciplinary perspective on how law-making, enforcement, and digital innovation intersect in the EU context.

Esittäjät : ERMINI ALESSANDRO

Yhteenveto : The workshop on the 28th legal regime was held on June 5, 2025 on request of the JURI Committee. Experts presented their findings on various aspects of the establishment of the 28th regime, including hurdles currently experienced by EU companies, EU competences to introduce the 28th regime, necessary safeguards, simplification of registration of companies, and the scope of the 28th regime. The workshop also included an intervention on behalf of the European Commission and the European Economic and Social Committee. These proceedings are prepared by the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Justice, Civil Liberties and Institutional Affairs for the JURI Committee.

Esittäjät : IVANOVA TSVETELINA VENTSISLAVOVA

Yhteenveto : This in-depth analysis explains the statistical nature of generative AI and how training on copyright-protected data results in persistent functional dependencies with respect to the used data. It highlights the challenges of attribution and novelty detection in these high-dimensional models, emphasizing the limitations of current methodologies. The study provides technical recommendations for traceability and output assessment mechanisms. This study is commissioned by the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Justice, Civil Liberties and Institutional Affairs at the request of the Committee on Legal Affairs.

Ulkopuolinen laatija : Axel BRANDO

Yhteenveto : This study examines the difficulties encountered by the EU in harmonising company law, notwithstanding the considerable expectations of economic operators. It reviews the limitations of earlier initiatives (e.g. the European company (SE), European private company (SPE) and single-member private limited-liability company (SUP)) – whether successful or not – and seeks to draw upon the successful model of the Organisation for the Harmonisation of Business Law in Africa (OHADA). It underscores the importance of having a strict legal framework in place to prevent malpractice arising from forum shopping and ensure fair competition in the single mark.

Ulkopuolinen laatija : Véronique GONCALVES, Charles DELAVENNE

Yhteenveto : This in-depth analysis, commissioned by the Policy Department for Justice, Civil Liberties and Institutional Affairs at the request of the European Parliament’s JURI committee, should be seen in the context of the development of a 28th legal regime, enabling innovative SMEs and start-ups to overcome the fragmentation of the internal market. To what extent can corporate law, insolvency, labour law or taxation in particular be harmonised by one or more voluntary instruments?

Ulkopuolinen laatija : Jacques ZILLER

Yhteenveto : This study, commissioned by the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Justice, Civil Liberties and Institutional Affairs at the request of the Committee on Legal Affairs, critically analyses the EU’s evolving approach to regulating civil liability for artificial intelligence systems. In order to avoid regulatory fragmentation between Member States, the study advocates for a strict liability regime targeting high-risk systems, structured around a single responsible operator and grounded in legal certainty, efficiency and harmonisation.

Ulkopuolinen laatija : Andrea BERTOLINI

Yhteenveto : This in-depth analysis, commissioned by the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Justice, Civil Liberties and Institutional Affairs at the request of the Committee on Legal Affairs, examines the scope of the proposed 28th regime. For the 28th regime to be successful, it needs to be user-friendly and widely adopted, thereby fostering trust and investment. Restricting access to 'innovative companies' could create bureaucratic obstacles that would discourage entrepreneurs and investors. Rather than restricting access, the 28th regime should be open to businesses of all kinds and designed to meet the needs of innovative businesses, including those with an exit strategy who wish to attract VC funding and those with a vision of long-term independence. Broad access to most parts of the 28th regime - especially in the area of company law - should be combined with targeted measures to a modular approach.

Ulkopuolinen laatija : Anne SANDERS

Yhteenveto : This in-depth analysis, commissioned by the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Justice, Civil Liberties and Institutional Affairs at the request of the Committee on Legal Affairs, explores the proposed 28th company law regime. It highlights the need for a unified, digital-native EU-level company registration system to reduce fragmentation, enhance legal certainty, and support innovation, entrepreneurship, and cross-border growth across the Single Market.

Ulkopuolinen laatija : Florian MÖSLEIN

Yhteenveto : The JURI Committee workshop on generative AI and copyright was held on June 4, 2025. Prof. Dr. Lucchi presented a study requested by the Committee on the legal aspects of the phenomenon. The complex relationship between copyright and generative AI from the perspective of technological and economic dimensions was addressed by the accompanying expertise of Dr. Axel Brando and Prof. Dr. Peukert, respectively. The workshop included a perspective from the creative sector, as well as a presentation of views from the European Commission. These proceedings are prepared by the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Justice, Civil Liberties and Institutional Affairs for the JURI Committee.

Esittäjät : IVANOVA TSVETELINA VENTSISLAVOVA

Yhteenveto : This study examines how generative AI challenges core principles of EU copyright law. It highlights the legal mismatch between AI training practices and current text and data mining exceptions, and the uncertain status of AI-generated content. These developments pose structural risks for the future of creativity in Europe, where a rich and diverse cultural heritage depends on the continued protection and fair remuneration of authors. The report calls for clear rules on input/output distinctions, harmonised opt-out mechanisms, transparency obligations, and equitable licensing models. To balance innovation and authors’ rights, the European Parliament is expected to lead reforms that reflect the evolving realities of creativity, authorship, and machine-generated expression. This study was commissioned by the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Justice, Civil Liberties and Institutional Affairs at the request of the Committee on Legal Affairs.

Ulkopuolinen laatija : Nicola Lucchi, Serra Hunter

Yhteenveto : This in-depth analysis, commissioned by the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Justice, Civil Liberties and Institutional Affairs at the request of the Committee on Legal Affairs, assesses the potential drivers and rationale for a possible 28th Regime as proposed in the Letta Report. The 28th Regime seeks to enable firms who wish to do so to operate under a new business law codified at European level. The intent is to enable firms, especially SMEs and innovative firms, to operate without friction across all EU Member States.

Ulkopuolinen laatija : J. Scott MARCUS and Apostolos THOMADAKIS

Yhteenveto : The European Parliament is vested with powers of democratic oversight and political scrutiny vis-à-vis the European Commission. These powers of Parliament enhance the democratic legitimacy of the EU as a whole, and help increase the transparency and accountability of the Commission as the EU's executive body. This study examines Parliament's oversight and scrutiny powers over the Commission. It focuses mainly, but not exclusively, on the powers that are enshrined in specific provisions of the EU Treaties. This includes Parliament's role in the Commission's investiture, in motions of censure, parliamentary questions, committees of inquiry and special committees, and in the Commission's obligations to report, consult and inform. It also looks into Parliament's scrutiny over budgetary issues, of delegated acts, in the context of the EU legislative procedure and agenda-setting, of legal proceedings before the Court of Justice of the European Union, and of the EU's external relations. The study builds on a previous EPRS study on parliamentary scrutiny of the Commission, originally requested by the European Parliament's Committee on Constitutional Affairs (AFCO) in 2018. The data presented in this edition focus on the ninth term parliamentary term (2019 to 2024).

Esittäjät : TENHUNEN Susanna, EISELE Katharina, AHAMAD MADATALI HANNAH NAFIZE, JANSEN Talander Hugo

Yhteenveto : This study of Reporting Obligations was commissioned by the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Justice, Civil Liberties and Institutional Affairs at the request of the JURI Committee. It provides an overview of regulatory reporting and disclosure overlaps that businesses face across the recently enacted Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD), and the EU Taxonomy. It provides recommendations on how to mitigate the burdens caused by these overlaps, together with a preliminary assessment of the Commission’s efforts to reduce burdens in the proposed Omnibus Directives.

Ulkopuolinen laatija : J. Scott MARCUS and Apostolos THOMADAKIS

Yhteenveto : The Policy Hub on Better Law-Making hold on 18 February, 2025 focused on challenges to EU law making. The French Senate’s report was presented and perceived as a wake-up call, urging a shift towards effective, accessible law-making in the EU. Academics highlighted issues of excessive legislation, the need for clearer and citizen-centered laws. They emphasized the need for simplifying legal texts, improving democratic scrutiny by the European Parliament, and fostering collaboration with academia. These proceeding are prepared by the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Justice, Civil Liberties and Institutional Affairs for the JURI Committee.

Ulkopuolinen laatija : Zuzana VANYSKOVA

Yhteenveto : These proceedings cover the Policy Hub on Better Law-Making in the European Union held on December 4, 2024. During the hub European academics indicated that European legislation is no longer fit for purpose and urgently needs modernisation. The experts recommended simplification of the structure and the drafting style of European legislation, citizen-centred approach to EU legislation, along with improving evidence base and digitisation. These proceedings are prepared by Policy Department for Justice, Civil Liberties and Institutional Affairs for the JURI Committee.

Ulkopuolinen laatija : Internal briefing - Zuzana VANYSKOVA

Yhteenveto : Professor Dr Xanthaki presented to JURI Committee a critical analysis of the "The 'one in, one out' principle - A real better lawmaking tool?". She concluded that the principle may lead to less (not better) legislation, purely on a arithmetical basis, and recommended to JURI Committee to focus on genuine better law-making tools, including a modernized, citizen-centred drafting structure and style for EU legislation, which she considered not fit for purpose in its current style. This briefing was commissioned by the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs at the request of the JURI Committee.

Esittäjät : VANÝSKOVÁ ZUZANA

Yhteenveto : Commitments made at the confirmation hearings of the Commissioners-designate 2024-2029