What changed between the plenary report and the adopted text

Removed:MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION

Added:P10_TA(2026)0065

Changed:on publicPublic access to documents – report covering the years 2022 - 2024

Removed:(2025/2137(INI))

Added:Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs

Added:PE778.284

Added:European Parliament resolution of 10 March 2026 on public access to documents – report covering the years 2022 - 2024 (2025/2137(INI))

4 unchanged paragraphs

The European Parliament,

– having regard to the Treaty on European Union (TEU), and in particular Articles 1, 9, 10, 11 and 16 thereof,

– having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), and in particular Article 15 thereof,

– having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the Charter), and in particular Articles 41 and 42 thereof,

Changed:– having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents1,documents,

Changed:– having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 September 2006 on the application of the provisions of the Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters to Community institutions and bodies2,bodies,

– having regard to the Commission proposal of 30 April 2008 for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (COM(2008)0229),

– having regard to the Commission proposal of 21 March 2011 for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (COM(2011)0137),

Changed:– having regard to its position at first reading of 15 December 2011 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents3,documents,

– having regard to the Commission communication of 11 February 2025 entitled ‘Commission work programme 2025’ (COM(2025)0045) and to its annexes thereto, and to the intention expressed there to withdraw the proposals COM(2011)0137 and COM(2008)0229 to amend Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents,

Changed:– having regard to Commission Decision (EU) 2024/3080 of 4 December 2024 establishing the Rules of Procedure of the Commission and amending Decision C(2000) 36144,3614,

Changed:– having regard to its resolution of 14 September 2017 on transparency, accountability and integrity in the EU institutions5,institutions,

Changed:– having regard to Directive (EU) 2019/1937 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2019 on the protection of persons who report breaches of Union law6,law,

Changed:– having regard to its resolution of 10 February 2021 on public access to documents7,documents,

Changed:– having regard to its resolution of 13 July 2023 on public access to documents – annual report for the years 2019-20218,2019-2021,

Changed:– having regard to its resolution of 14 March 2024 on the time the European Commission takes to deal with requests for public access to documents9,documents,

– having regard to the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR),

Changed:– having regard to the judgments of the General Court of 17 July 2024 in Cases T-689/21, Auken and Others v Commission, and T-761/21, Courtois and Others v Commission10,Commission,

Changed:– having regard to the judgment of the General Court of 14 May 2025 in Case T-36/23, Stevi and The New York Times v Commission11 ,Commission,

Changed:– having regard to the reports and decisions of the European Ombudsman, in particular Special Report OI/2/2022/OAM12OI/2/2022/OAM and the decisions in cases 1316/2021/MIG13and1316/2021/MIGand 1499/2021/SF14,1499/2021/SF,

– having regard to Rule 122(7) and Rule 149 of its Rules of Procedure,

– having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

– having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A10-0011/2026),

Change 1

Changed:A. whereas the EU Treaties guarantee every citizen the right to democratic participation and transparent decision-making, requiring EU institutions, bodies, offices and agencies to grant the public access to documents; whereas this fundamental right of access to documents, protected by the Treaties and the Charter, enables effective citizen scrutiny15,scrutiny, and should therefore be exercised proactively;

10 unchanged paragraphs

B. whereas the CJEU has affirmed that public access to documents is an essential part of participatory democracy; whereas it has ruled that public scrutiny of information used in legislative activities is a precondition for the proper functioning of democratic powers and the exercise of democratic rights; whereas the CJEU has also stressed that transparency is inherent in the legislative procedure and that decisions must be taken as openly and as close to citizens as possible;

C. whereas Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 recognises the particular importance of providing even broader access to documents when EU institutions act in their legislative capacity and underlines the particular need to ensure direct access to legislative documents;

D. whereas citizens legitimately expect transparency, efficiency and accountability from public authorities, and the EU institutions, bodies, offices and agencies should respond to those expectations in a clear and comprehensible manner; whereas openness and good governance in the functioning of the EU and its decision-making process are essential to building citizens’ trust in the EU and to ensuring greater legitimacy, effectiveness and accountability of the administration; whereas the principles of openness and transparency should govern not only the decision-making process but also the way in which a text is drafted;

E. whereas timely access to reliable and accurate information is crucial for safeguarding against misinformation and effectively countering the spread of disinformation; whereas delays in granting such access undermine this process;

F. whereas the EU is founded on representative democracy and its institutions, bodies, offices and agencies must uphold the highest standards of transparency and integrity to enable robust public scrutiny and meaningful citizen participation in good governance;

G. whereas the role of the European Ombudsman has been essential in safeguarding public access to documents, including through the recommendations set out in Special Report OI/2/2022/OAM; whereas the EU institutions must ensure that the European Ombudsman can continue to exercise this role effectively;

H. whereas the European Ombudsman’s strategic inquiry outlined in that Special Report revealed systemic and significant delays by the Commission, particularly in its handling of confirmatory applications (requests by applicants to review its initial response) following initial refusals to grant citizens access to documents;

I. whereas in Case 1499/2021/SF, the Ombudsman found unequivocally that the Council’s refusal to give full public access to documents related to legislative negotiations constituted maladministration;

J. whereas no penalties are provided for in the event of failure to comply with the 15-day deadline under Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 on granting or refusing access to documents;

K. whereas Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 acknowledges the importance of granting broad access to documents when EU institutions act in their legislative capacity and emphasises the necessity of ensuring direct access to legislative documents;

Change 2

Changed:L. whereas in May 2021, a journalist requested access to documents, including text messages between the Commission President and Pfizer, but the Commission stated that it held no such records on the basis of internal registration rules; whereas the way in which the Commission handled the case is a matter of concern; whereas the European Ombudsman concluded that this response from the Commission constituted maladministration and presented several recommendations as a follow-up of the case, including on how to record text messages, and recommended a renewed search, in line with the public access obligations under Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001; whereas on 14 May 2025, the General Court annulled the Commission decision to withhold the text messages; whereas, according to the Court, the Commission failed to provide a plausible explanation to justify not possessing the messages16;messages;

M. whereas, under Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, text messages qualify as ‘documents’ when they concern matters relating to the policies, activities or decisions falling within an institution’s sphere of responsibility, since a ‘document’ is defined as any content, whatever its medium (on paper, in electronic form or as a sound, visual or audiovisual recording); whereas this does not mean that all text messages exchanged must be registered and accessible, but only those relating to the EU’s policies, activities or decisions; whereas the Commission may still refuse to grant full public access to such messages where one of the exceptions provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, such as the protection of commercial interests, applies;

Change 3

Changed:N. whereas on 6 October 2025, the Commission published in the Official Journal (C/2025/5423) a formal withdrawal of legislative proposals, in particular COM(2011)0137 and COM(2008)0229 ,COM(2008)0229, both aimed at amending Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 on public access to documents, in the light of the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, citing the absence of any foreseeable agreement, following years of legislative deadlock since 2011; whereas this continued impasse raises concerns that reliance on the 2001 framework alone may no longer suffice to effectively reinforce the right of public access to EU documents in a modern institutional and technological context;

O. whereas the rapid advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies presents both opportunities and challenges for ensuring accurate and transparent information within the EU and its institutions, bodies, offices and agencies, while appropriately designed and governed AI systems can help detect and mitigate misinformation and disinformation and thereby support an informed public discourse, provided that their deployment fully respects fundamental rights, promotes accountability and upholds high standards of transparency in order to maintain public trust and strengthen democratic governance;

Change 4

Changed:P. whereas in Case C-588/21 P17,P, concerning an application by non-profit organisations requesting access to technical standards on the safety of toys, the Court of Justice held that the Commission should have recognised an overriding public interest under Article 4(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, justifying the disclosure of such harmonised standards;

1. Strongly emphasises that transparency and access to documents constitute fundamental rights under EU law, essential for ensuring transparent, democratic, accountable and meaningful citizen participation;

Annual reports on public access to documents

2. Notes that in 2024, the Commission amended its transparency framework by adopting revised Rules of Procedure, in an attempt to clarify rules on public access to documents under Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001; underlines that concerns were raised by some stakeholders about the revised rules, in particular about the definition of what qualifies as a ‘document’, the additional exceptions to the obligation to register documents or presumptions of non-disclosure, the compliance of that definition and these exceptions and presumptions with established CJEU case-law, and the fact that they would undermine transparency, which would represent a step backwards, and would also undermine the uniform application of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001;

Change 5

Changed:3. Observes that in 2024, the Commission received 6 938 initial access to document requests and 641 confirmatory applications, marking a 7 % increase in confirmatory applications compared to 202318;2023; observes that in 2023, the Commission received 7 274 initial access to document requests and 599 confirmatory applications, marking a 43 % increase in confirmatory applications compared to 202219;2022; observes that in 2022, the Commission received 7 410 initial access to document requests and 418 confirmatory applications, marking a 17.817,8 % increase in confirmatory applications compared to 202120;2021;

4. Highlights that the Commission, in dealing with confirmatory applications, decided to grant partial or full access to documents in 51 % of cases in 2022, 85 % of cases in 2023 and 60 % of cases in 2024; notes that confirmatory applications increased while initial requests decreased, and that the ratio of decisions reversed at the confirmatory application stage; points out that this illustrates a failure to assess initial requests thoroughly;

Change 6

Changed:5. Highlights the fact that, by 31 December 2024, Parliament’s Public Register of Documents contained 918 803 references (up from 898 267 at the end of 2023); notes that the overall positive response rate remained high at 91 %, with applications handled within approximately nine working days on average21;average;

6. Acknowledges that the Commission received the most access to documents requests out of all the EU institutions, with its Secretariat-General and Directorate-General for Health and Food Safety receiving the most requests;

Change 7

Changed:7. Observes that in 2024 the Commission issued 5 542 initial-stage replies and 305 confirmatory replies, while the other EU institutions have also made progress in their efforts to improve transparency: the Council’s register contained over 527 000 documents by the end of 2024, with more than 72 % of them publicly available, and it processed over 2 800 access requests, mainly from civil society and academia, granting full or partial access in 85 % of cases22;cases;

6 unchanged paragraphs

8. Welcomes these trends as they highlight the EU’s ongoing commitment to transparency amid complex legal and political challenges; notes, however, that in 85 % of the reviewed cases, the Commission did not take a decision within the legal time limits and that, in 60 % of the cases, the delay amounted to more than 60 working days;

Recent developments

9. Stresses that, in accordance with Article 4(6) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, even where certain information must be withheld on the basis of justified reasons, partial disclosure should be considered and the remaining parts of the requested document must be released, taking into account the overriding public interest in transparency and disclosure, which encompass the principles of sound governance, institutional efficiency, democratic accountability and enhanced civic engagement in the decision-making process;

10. Firmly believes that a strong and consistent commitment to public access to documents and to transparency constitutes a fundamental pillar of the EU’s democratic system, enhancing citizens’ engagement and participation and contributing to good governance and sound financial management; believes, considering the current context of hybrid threats and warfare, that it is important to help counter conspiracy narratives and disinformation, and that committing to this will contribute to reinforcing the EU’s resilience against foreign interference and attempts to undermine its integrity;

11. Considers that applying a proactive approach and adopting faster, less cumbersome and more accessible procedures for handling complaints against refusals to grant access would help to ensure effective transparency, prevent legal disputes and avoid unnecessary costs and burdens;

12. Expresses concern over the persistent over-classification of official documents by EU institutions, bodies, offices and agencies, which is in breach of the principle of transparency; reiterates its long-standing call, as conveyed in its previous resolutions on public access to documents, for the establishment of clear, consistent and legally binding rules governing the classification and declassification of documents in order to safeguard democratic accountability;