President European Commission

 

Dear President,

I have received a complaint against the European Commission about the above matter from a Polish organisation - Green REV Institute.

The Commission planned to adopt a legislative proposal on sustainable food systems, as foreseen under the ‘Farm to Fork’ strategy, by the end of 2023.[1] The complainant contends that, although the Commission did not include this proposal in its 2024 work programme, it failed to communicate to the public the reasons for the delay and to provide an updated timeframe concerning this legislative initiative. The complainant points out that the Commission has already collected feedback from stakeholders on the inception impact assessment concerning this initiative and, subsequently, held a public consultation. In this context, the complainant believes that the Commission owes to the public concrete information about the status of the initiative and its further plans with regard to it. Although the complainant and other organisations have contacted the Commission to obtain more information, the complainant is not satisfied with the Commission’s reply, which it considers too general.

I have decided to open an inquiry and to seek the Commission’s views on the complaint.

I would like to recall that the Commission is “a key player in the legislative process”[2] because, among other things, it has “the power to decide whether or not to submit a proposal”. In particular, “the Commission’s decision to abandon... the legislative initiative envisaged puts a definitive end to the planned legislative action”.[3] In view of this important role, the Commission should conduct its work on legislative proposals in a transparent manner,[4] which is also reflected to an extent in the inter-institutional agreement on ‘Better Regulation’[5] and the Commission’s ‘Better Regulation Guidelines’.[6] While it is the Commission’s prerogative to decide whether and when to adopt a specific legislative proposal, the Commission should remain accountable to the public by communicating its reasons for proceeding with, halting or withdrawing legislative initiatives.

Having regard to this role, I invite the Commission to send a written reply on some of the issues raised in the complaint, namely, the reasons for the delay in proceeding with the initiative in question, the current status of the Commission’s work on it, the Commission’s plans with regard to it, and a provisional timeframe for its adoption (if this adoption is still considered). I would be grateful to receive the Commission’s reply by 19 November 2025.

As regards the aspect of the complaint that concerns the lack of transparency about the results of the public consultation on this initiative, I have concluded that there are no grounds for me to open an inquiry. I note that the Commission has published a clear summary report on this consultation and the contributions it received.[7] That said, the Commission is welcome to share any additional views on this aspect of the case, should it whish so.

Please note that I am likely to send the Commission’s reply and related enclosures to the complainant for comments^[8]. I would therefore be grateful if the Commission could submit a translation of the reply itself in Polish, which is the language of the complaint. I may also decide to publish your reply. The responsible case-handler is Mr Michał Krajewski.

Yours sincerely,

Teresa Anjinho
European Ombudsman

Strasbourg, 19/08/2025

 

[1] https://food.ec.europa.eu/horizontal-topics/farm-fork-strategy/legislative-framework_en.

[2] Judgment of the Court of Justice of 4 September 2018, ClientEarth v Commission, Case C-57/16 P, paragraph 88, https://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf;jsessionid=4472A6B90ABFC0D1B87157D93660BCCC?text=&docid=205322&pageIndex=0&doclang=en&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=3911505.

[3] Case ClientEarth v Commission, Case C-57/16 P, paragraph 87.

[4] Case ClientEarth v Commission, Case C-57/16 P, paragraph 91.

[5] Point 2 of Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission on Better Law-Making, OJ L 123/1, http://data.europa.eu/eli/agree_interinstit/2016/512/oj. This agreement obliges the Commission to explain some of its decisions within the EU legislative process. See, for instance, point 9.

[6] These Guidelines require the Commission to provide some feedback to stakeholders and participants in public consultations. See point 5.2.3. (p. 21) of the Commission’s ‘Better Regulation Guidelines’, https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/d0bbd77f-bee5-4ee5-b5c4-6110c7605476_en?filename=swd2021_305_en.pdf.

[7] https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/13174-Sustainable-food-system-setting-up-an-EU-framework/public-consultation_en

[8] If you wish to submit documents or information that you consider to be confidential, and which should not be disclosed to the complainant, please mark them ‘Confidential’. Encrypted emails can be sent to our dedicated mailbox.Information and documents of this kind will be deleted from the European Ombudsman’s files shortly after the inquiry has ended.