Viimased dokumendid

Kokkuvõte : This document provides background information for the Members participating in the mission to the 19th session of the Conference of States Parties to the CRPD, New York, from 9 to 11 June 2026.

Autorid : MAKAY Monika, SKUBIEJŪTĖ Greta

Kokkuvõte : This Briefing critically analyses the new EU Anti-Racism Strategy 2026-2030 (the Strategy) which was launched by the European Commission in January 2026. The Briefing situates the Strategy within the landscape of the existing EU anti-racism infrastructure including the primary and secondary legislation, case law, and other policy initiatives and efforts to combat racism, including the Strategy’s precursor, the EU Anti-Racism Action Plan 2020-2025 (the Plan). The Briefing shows that the EU’s anti-racism infrastructure, especially the Council Directive 2000/43/EC of 29 June 2000 implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin, commonly known as the ‘Racial Equality Directive’, is robust in principle. Yet, it is underutilised and ultimately ineffective. The low rates of litigation under the Racial Equality Directive at the CJEU are evidence of its underutilisation. The high rates of existing levels of racism across EU Member States, such as recorded in successive FRA reports, evidence its ineffectiveness. It is against this backdrop that the Strategy, and previously the Plan, were adopted. The Plan was meant to be a ‘step up’ in the EU’s fight against racism. The immediate impetus for the adoption of the Plan came from the global Black Lives Matter protests following George Floyd’s death in the US. The Plan sought to address racism comprehensively and at all levels including individual, structural, and the EU’s internal – institutional – level. While the Plan covered much ground, it prioritised coverage and scale over precision and ambition. That is, the Plan lacked a precise normative framework of both racism and anti-racism; and at the same time lacked ambition by failing to identify benchmarks for improvement against which the impact of anti-racism measures could be tested. The Strategy which succeeds the Plan marks not only a semantic, but a more deliberate and determined, shift in the Commission’s approach to anti-racism. In particular, the Strategy is defined by three normative shifts: the adoption of an economic rationale for anti-racism; the shift in focus towards structural racism; and the centring of participation and partnerships in the fight against racism. These shifts are accompanied by a range of measures reinforcing the need to strengthen monitoring, enforcement, and implementation of law and policy against racism in the EU. Together, both the normative and operational aspects of the Strategy may be considered more ambitious than the Plan. Yet, the Strategy leaves significant gaps, both normatively and operationally. The success of the Strategy will depend not on how well it is executed but whether it is able to surmount the challenges posed by these gaps. These include: (i) the development of a working definition of structural racism which exceeds belief, ideology, and animus; (ii) the coordination of EU anti-racism measures across all forms of racism, all forms of discrimination, and all other issues facing the EU; (iii) the development of a common approach to intersectionality which defines and operationalises the concept at the same time; (iv) the development of a legal framework for addressing the alarming rise of xenophobia and xenophobic discrimination; (v) the prioritisation of the voices of racially disadvantaged individuals and groups; (vi) the adoption of the Horizontal Equal Treatment Directive; and (vii) the formulation of more ambitious and comprehensive programmatic approach to positive action measures for addressing racial disadvantage.

Parlamendiväline autor : Shreya ATREY

Kokkuvõte : The Cybersecurity Act (CSA) came into force in 2019 as part of the EU's broader efforts to build strengthened cybersecurity. The CSA formalised the role of the European Union Agency for Cybersecurity (ENISA), giving it a permanent mandate, resources and tasks, including operational ones. It also established a voluntary European cybersecurity certification framework (ECCF) for ICT products, services and processes. The ECCF aims to set up and maintain specific certification schemes, allowing companies operating in the EU to use certificates recognised across all Member States. In January 2025, a targeted amendment to the CSA was adopted to enable the future adoption of European certification schemes for 'managed security services' – cybersecurity risk management services provided by third-party providers – covering areas such as incident response, penetration testing, security audits and consultancy. The CSA requires an evaluation and review every five years. After being postponed several times, the current proposal is the result of this review. The Commission published the CSA review proposal on 20 January 2026, together with targeted amendments to the NIS2 Directive. The proposal aims to clarify ENISA's mandate and improve the ECCF, and introduces new measures for secure and resilient ICT supply chains. In the Parliament, the file has been assigned to the Industry, Research and Energy committee (ITRE), and Marketa Gregorova (Greens/EFA, Czechia) was appointed rapporteur.

Autorid : CAR POLONA, DE LUCA Stefano

Kokkuvõte : On 12 July 2023, the Commission published its proposal for a revision of the Victims' Rights Directive, the key EU legislation on the protection of the rights of victims of crime. In Parliament, the file was handled by the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE) and the Committee on Women's Rights and Gender Equality (FEMM) under the joint committee procedure. The text, agreed by the Council and Parliament on 10 December 2025, requires Member States to put in place victims' helplines to facilitate the reporting of criminal offences by victims and third parties, ensure access to legal aid for those who need it and ensure compensation for victims through the adoption of execution measures and enforcement measures. Support services for victims with specific needs will need to be made available and access to child-friendly services will need to be ensured for child victims. Victims' personal data will also need to be protected.

Autorid : PRPIC Martina

Kokkuvõte : According to Directive 2008/115/EC, third-country nationals staying illegally on the territory of a European Union (EU) Member State should, as a general rule, be issued a return decision obliging them to leave the EU. However, available data suggest that, among those who receive such a decision, only about a quarter actually leave the EU. The limited effectiveness of the return policy is due to several challenges that the EU and Member States face when carrying out return procedures, including difficulties related to implementation at national level. To increase the effectiveness of the EU return policy, the European Commission announced in its 2025 work programme that it would develop a new common approach to returns, including a new legislative proposal on the subject.

Autorid : RADJENOVIC Anja

Kokkuvõte : In the European Union (EU), trade in drug precursors – substances that may have legitimate commercial or industrial applications but are also used to produce illicit drugs – is governed by two regulations, addressing intra-EU and external trade respectively. These laws seek to prevent the diversion of precursors without hindering the commercial interests of lawful operators. However, the mechanism put in place, based on listing individual substances and imposing strict conditions on their trade, has encountered challenges, particularly as a result of developments in drug markets. To address the concerns confronting the EU framework, several EU policy instruments have announced a revision of the legislation in force. In December 2025, the European Commission presented a proposal that would merge the two regulations. The initiative reflects the European Commission's intention to reduce the administrative burden for operators and national authorities while setting a regulatory framework more adaptable to drug market developments.

Autorid : BAKOWSKI Piotr

Kokkuvõte : The powers of Europol, the EU's law enforcement cooperation agency, have expanded considerably in the past decade, with the agency now analysing crime trends in the EU and supporting EU Member State-initiated investigations. In 2016, the EU legislator established a new legal basis for Europol (the Europol Regulation), which strengthened its data management and data protection rules and introduced enhanced scrutiny. In 2022, the adoption of Regulation (EU) 2022/991 ushered in new rules enabling Europol to receive personal data directly from private parties, process large and complex data sets, exchange personal data with third countries and use data for research and innovation. At the same time, this major expansion of competences regarding data access, processing and exchange raised compatibility questions concerning the current EU data protection framework. The European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) has been very critical in this regard and has brought legal proceedings before the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU); the case is pending. In her 18 July 2024 political guidelines for the next European Commission, Commission President Ursula von der Leyen proposed making Europol 'a truly operational police agency'. In December 2025, the Commission published an evaluation report of Regulation (EU) 2022/991. It concluded that Member States continue to support Europol's role in key areas, particularly concerning its new personal data processing tasks. However, the evaluation report also highlighted that, 'to maximise the benefits of the new personal data processing powers, some stakeholders believe there is a need to address possible inefficiencies, notably within the existing governance, administration, and data protection framework'. In its work programme for 2026, the Commission envisages a revision of the Europol Regulation. According to the call for evidence, the Commission plans to publish the new proposal in the second quarter of 2026, accompanied by an evaluation of the 2016 Europol Regulation and an impact assessment of the proposed amending legislation prepared simultaneously ('back-to-back'). It remains to be seen what course the Commission will propose for Europol and how it will ensure adequate scrutiny and oversight of the agency by bodies such as the European Parliament and the EDPS.

Autorid : EISELE Katharina

Kokkuvõte : The IA underpins the revision of legislation on precursors to enhancе the monitoring and control of drug and designer precursors in order to reduce the availability of drug precursors for illicit drug manufacturing and to facilitate legitimate trade and use of drug precursors. The IA provides an overall well-structured and evidence-based analysis supporting the legislative proposal on drug precursors. The need for EU action is sufficiently justified and subsidiarity is adequately addressed; however, proportionality is only partially examined. The IA presents a well-evidenced problem definition and identifies the initiative's general and specific objectives, which appear to be specific, achievable, relevant and measurable, but not time-bound, as recommended by the Better Regulation Toolbox 'S.M.A.R.T.' criteria. The IA considers three policy options; however, they appear partly cumulative and not always clearly differentiated, while certain measures lack clarity in their design and justification. The assessment of economic impacts is detailed, including quantified administrative cost savings and expected burden reduction through digitalisation, with positive implications for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and competitiveness. Social and environmental impacts are discussed transparently, though largely qualitatively and with limited quantification. Nevertheless, the IA is transparent about the evidence and analytical methods used, including the underlying assumptions and limitations. Stakeholders were widely consulted, and their views considered; however, the feedback from this consultation strategy could have been reflected more effectively in the IA. The preferred option (PO2) is presented as the most balanced and effective, combining strengthened controls with simplification and digitalisation, while monitoring indicators – particularly on social outcomes – could be strengthened. It appears that efforts were made to address the Regulatory Scrutiny Board's recommendations, but some weaknesses remain. Finally, it appears that the proposal is mostly in line with the preferred option of the IA, with a couple of issues remaining, which are detailed in the briefing.

Autorid : EFTHYMIADOU Andriana

Autorid : SANDERSKI ANDRZEJ, CROSSFIELD CLARE BABETTE, SERPIERI Margherita

Kokkuvõte : Minors — under the age of 18 — may migrate in many different ways, through family reunification, moving in the hope of finding a better life, or through forced and traumatic migration caused by conflict, poverty or climate change. Overall, the number of minors in migration has been rising globally since the turn of the century. In 2020, there were an estimated 35.5 million international migrant minors globally, the largest number ever recorded. This is equivalent to around 1 in 66 minors worldwide living outside their country of birth. This infographic focuses exclusively on forced and irregular movements of migrant minors to the European Union. Eurostat figures show that, on 1 January 2024 around 7.5 million minors in the EU were not citizens of their country of residence. However, age assessment of migrants remains a critical challenge, as a significant number arrive without reliable identification documents to verify their claimed age.

Autorid : MACSAI GYORGYI, MENTZELOPOULOU Maria-Margarita

Kokkuvõte : 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.

Autorid : ANGLMAYER Irmgard, KRAMER Esther

Parlamendiväline autor : Edoardo BRESSANELLI

Kokkuvõte : The main objective of European Union regulation of drug precursors is to strike a balance between preserving the legitimate interests of businesses that commercialise chemical substances for licit economic activities, and the need for controls to prevent their diversion to illicit narcotic drugs production. However, measures to control the trade in drug precursors only partially prevent their illicit use. Despite reforms to apply controls to new substances more rapidly, criminal networks have demonstrated their ability to circumvent the rules by using unscheduled (see below) and ever-emerging substances to further produce narcotic drugs and psychoactive substances. They also seize opportunities provided by new global trade modus operandi via postal or online platforms. The inclusion of substances submitted to strict control on a list is no longer sufficient; drug precursor regulations have become only one of the tools available to prevent, reduce and eventually end their misuse. The need to revise the drug precursors regulations as envisaged in the European Commission's 2025 work programme is not put into question; however, the revision needs to be understood and conceived within the broader policy framework on the fight against drugs trafficking and be supported by operational measures, such as innovative technologies to detect drug precursors within the EU and across its borders. The Commission is expected to publish the new proposal on 3 December 2025.

Autorid : HUEMER MARIE-ASTRID

Kokkuvõte : 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.

Autorid : ANGLMAYER Irmgard, DALLI HUBERT, IOANNIDES Isabelle

Kokkuvõte : 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.

Autorid : TUOMINEN ULLA-MARI

Kokkuvõte : 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.

Autorid : PATAKI Gabor Zsolt

Kokkuvõte : The European Commission’s LGBTIQ+ Equality Strategy 2026–2030 builds on the previous 2020–2025 Strategy, reaffirming the EU’s commitment to equality, protection and inclusion of LGBTIQ people. It introduces a stronger focus on combating hate-motivated violence and harassment, including online hate and disinformation, while maintaining intersectionality and equality mainstreaming as cross-cutting principles.

Parlamendiväline autor : Pieter CANNOOT

Kokkuvõte : This study provides a complementary impact assessment of the proposed Council directive on equal treatment outside of employment on the grounds of religion or belief, disability, age, and sexual orientation. It covers all EU Member States. Moreover, it includes five case studies: Czechia, Germany, Italy, Romania and Sweden. It reviews the necessity of the proposed EU initiative and its added value, considering subsidiarity and proportionality. The study analyses the coherence of the proposed directive with existing and future frameworks and its likely effectiveness in achieving the objectives of increased protection and inclusion, and combating discrimination. It also assesses the proposal's likely costs and benefits. The findings suggest that the proposed directive responds to the need for EU action and complies with the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality. It is coherent with the existing legal and policy framework and would significantly strengthen fundamental rights and close the protection gap against discrimination. The proposed directive is expected to generate limited costs, mainly relating to reasonable accommodation in education, while delivering significant social and economic benefits, notably through improved access to goods and services.

Autorid : EFTHYMIADOU Andriana

Parlamendiväline autor : Howard, Erica; McGuinn, Jennifer; Adamis-Császár, Katalin; Gustave, Flore; Petracco, Charlie

Kokkuvõte : 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.

Autorid : EISELE Katharina, DE GROOT DAVID ARMAND JACQUES GERA

Kokkuvõte : This study reviews the current framework to protect democracy in the EU in view of the forthcoming European Democracy Shield. It provides a comprehensive map of the existing instruments, while identifying and assessing outstanding policy challenges, regulatory gaps and implementation issues. The study also formulates recommendations to strengthen democratic resilience. The study was commissioned by the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Justice, Civil Liberties and Institutional Affairs at the request of the EUDS Special Committee

Autorid : BRESSANELLI EDOARDO

Kokkuvõte : This paper, 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), proposes a more citizen-centred approach to monitoring and reporting on the application and enforcement of EU law by the European Commission. It would involve widening the lens through which the application and enforcement of EU law is monitored beyond reporting on the infringement procedure under Articles 258-260 TFEU. It would consider how citizens perceive their EU rights and interact with the full range of enforcement and redress mechanisms at their disposal and consider whether they are sufficiently well-designed to assist citizens to fully realise their rights.

Parlamendiväline autor : Dr. Sara DRAKE and Dr. Carmela BOSANGIT

Kokkuvõte : 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).

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

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

Autorid : SCHONARD Martina

Kokkuvõte : The European Parliament Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs organised upon request of the Committee on Civil liberties, Justice and Home Affairs a Workshop on “The EU as a Union of Equality?”, which took place on Tuesday 19 March 2024 from 14.30 to 16.00 pm. The present document collects the transcriptions of the audio-video recordings of the event, which are publicly available on the EP website.

Autorid : MARZOCCHI Ottavio, SANDU Georgiana, ABRIL MARTI PABLO