Members of the European Parliament have called on the European Court of Justice to intervene on certain legal aspects of the Mercosur trade deal.

Midlands North West MEP Ciaran Mullooly and other MEPs from various other political groups in the European Parliament are seeking an EU Court of Justice opinion on whether the trade deal's current structure stands up under EU law.

Mullooly said that he is "confident" that the court may well rule against the European Commission and the method of splitting and splicing this trade agreement.

ADVERTISEMENT

Speaking on Monday 3 November Mullooly said: "There’s been an important development in the battle to stall the EU-Mercosur deal in the European Parliament this afternoon. I’ve said from the start I’d do everything in my power to stop this rotten deal and I’m now joining colleagues to mount a legal challenge."

The motion for a resolution will be submitted on 14 November, with a view to being put to the vote during the plenary session from 24 to 27 November in Strasbourg.

This motion focuses in particular on examining:

  • The rebalancing mechanism provided for in the agreement, considering that this mechanism allows a party to seek compensation if a measure applied by the other party nullifies or substantially impairs any benefit accruing to it even though the said measure would comply with the Agreement and with the WTO rulebook.
  • The legal basis chosen by the European Commission and its decision to split the EU Mercosur agreement into an EU-Mercosur Partnership Agreement (EMPA) and an Interim Trade Agreement (ITA); the decisions taken here by the Commission might violate the 1999 Negotiating Directives and the 2018 Council conclusions recalling that the EU-Mercosur should be a mixed agreement, requiring national ratifications.
  • Compliance with the precautionary principle, considering that sanitary and phytosanitary measures may be taken in a more restrictive manner as per the Agreement than what the EU precautionary principle allows, the latter being also at risk of future decisions taken by an arbitration panel as to its application.

    • Coalition

    Meanwhile, Independent MEP Michael McNamara has joined the coalition to jointly table a motion and said that politically the trade deal, “stinks”.

    "Beyond differences of opinion on the merits or drawbacks of the agreement, we deem it essential to preserve the European legal order, to guarantee compliance with the acquis communautaire and to ensure sincere cooperation between the European institutions.

    The EU-Mercosur agreement, he added, raises profound questions on these matters and ensuring that the EU considers only legally sound commitments is a matter of credibility.

    “I’m backing this cross-party move because there must be a doubt about the legality of circumventing the say-so of national parliaments on this trade deal particularly when everybody knows that this chicanery is being employed because some national parliaments are likely to block this,” he said.

    The European Union, its commissioners and president Von der Leyen, he argued, continue to pay “lip service” to subsidiarity, which should mean that national and perhaps even regional parliaments should be heard.