Date: 2026-01-13Category: Not ApplicableState: Union GovernmentCountry: Europe
Resolution (EU) 2026/61 of the European Parliament of 22 October 2025 with observations forming an integral part of the decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2023, Section II – European Council and Council
**Executive Summary**
This document is a resolution of the European Parliament regarding the discharge of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2023, specifically concerning Section II - European Council and Council. It expresses concerns about the Council's lack of cooperation in the discharge procedure and calls for improved transparency and accountability. The resolution was adopted on October 22, 2025, and it stresses the need for the Council to address these issues promptly.
**Key Points / Main Content**
* **Discharge Procedure Concerns:**
* The Council continues to refuse to cooperate with Parliament on the discharge procedure, hindering Parliament's ability to make an informed decision.
* The Council did not answer the questionnaire from Parliament to enable a thorough scrutiny of the implementation of the Council budget.
* The Council did not participate in the hearing arranged for November 12, 2024.
* **Transparency and Accountability:**
* The European Council and the Council should be transparent and democratically accountable to Union citizens.
* Parliament holds the right and the obligation to scrutinise the budgets.
* **Interinstitutional Cooperation:**
* The current situation must be improved through better interinstitutional cooperation within the existing framework of the Treaties.
* The Council must resume negotiations with Parliament at the highest level as soon as possible to break the deadlock and find a solution.
* **Specific Recommendations:**
* Observations concerning budgetary and financial management, internal management, performance and internal control, human resources, equality and well-being, ethical framework and transparency, digitalisation, cybersecurity and data protection, buildings, environment and sustainability, interinstitutional cooperation and communication from its discharge resolution of 7 May 2025 are still valid.
* Reiterates its regret that the budget of the European Council and the Council has not been divided into two clearly separated budgets as recommended by Parliament in previous discharge resolutions in order to improve transparency and accountability.
* Calls for targeted treaty reforms to enhance democratic decision-making and transparency within the European Council;
* **Support for Ukraine:**
* Welcomes the decision to adopt conclusions supported by 26 Member States on the Union's continued and unwavering support for Ukraine's independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity.
* **Council Presidency Misconduct:**
* Urges the Council to ensure that the Presidency of the Council is conducted strictly in line with Union law, principles and the Union's credibility.
* Deplores the Hungarian government's misconduct of the Presidency of the Council in pursuing bilateral activities that contradict the Union's fundamental values.
**Impact Analysis**
**European Council and Council:**
*Impact*
The Council is affected by the Parliament's continued refusal to grant discharge due to perceived lack of cooperation and transparency. The Council's reputation and credibility as an accountable institution are at stake.
*Action Required*
The Council needs to engage in meaningful cooperation with the Parliament, answer their questions, and demonstrate a commitment to transparency and accountability. They are urged to resume negotiations with Parliament at the highest level to find a solution.
**European Parliament:**
*Impact*
The Parliament's ability to fulfill its duty of budgetary control is hindered by the Council's lack of cooperation. This affects the Parliament's credibility in ensuring democratic accountability.
*Action Required*
The Parliament needs to continue to exert its prerogative to grant discharge and to insist on improved transparency and cooperation from the Council. They must pursue negotiations and consider treaty reforms to improve the discharge procedure.
**EU Citizens/Taxpayers:**
*Impact*
EU citizens are impacted by the perceived lack of transparency and accountability in the use of public funds. This can erode trust in the EU institutions.
*Action Required*
Citizens should continue to demand transparency and accountability from EU institutions.
Key Entities Referenced
European Parliament: The primary institution responsible for granting discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget.
European Council: One of the Union institutions and recipient of the general budget, which is the subject of the discharge procedure.
Council: A Union institution and recipient of the general budget, subject to the discharge procedure alongside the European Council.
Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU): The Treaty outlining the responsibilities of the European Parliament in budget implementation and discharge.
Financial Regulation: The regulation governing the implementation of the Union's budget.
Official Journal EN
of the European Union L series
2026/61 13.1.2026
RESOLUTION(EU) 2026/61 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
of 22 October 2025
with observations forming an integral part of the decision on discharge in respect of the
implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2023,
Section II – European Council and Council
THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,
— having regard to its decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European
Union for the financial year 2023, Section II – European Council and Council,
— having regard to Rule 102 of and Annex V to its Rules of Procedure,
— having regard to the second report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A10-0167/2025),
A. whereas in the context of the discharge procedure, the discharge authority wishes to stress the particular importance
of further strengthening the democratic legitimacy of the Union institutions by improving transparency and
accountability and implementing a good governance of human resources;
B. whereas, under Article 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), the Parliament has the
sole responsibility of granting discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the Union, and
whereas the budget of the European Council and of the Council is a section of the Union budget;
C. whereas, pursuant to Article 15(1) of the Treaty on European Union, the European Council is not to exercise
legislative functions;
D. whereas, under Article 317 TFEU, the Commission is to implement the Union budget on its own responsibility,
having regard to the principles of sound financial management, and whereas, under the framework in place, the
Commission is to confer on the other Union institutions the requisite powers for the implementation of the sections
of the budget relating to them;
E. whereas, under Articles 235(4) and 240(2) TFEU, the European Council and the Council (the ‘Council’) are assisted by
the General Secretariat of the Council, and whereas the Secretary-General of the Council is wholly responsible for the
sound management of the appropriations entered in Section II of the Union budget;
F. whereas, over the course of almost 20 years, Parliament has been implementing the well-established and respected
practice of granting discharge to all Union institutions, bodies, offices and agencies, and whereas the Commission
supports that the practice of giving discharge to each Union institution, body, office and agency for its administrative
expenditure should continue to be pursued;
G. whereas, according to Article 59(1) of the Financial Regulation, the Commission shall confer on the other Union
Institutions the requisite powers for the implementation of the sections of the budget relating to them;
H. whereas, since 2009, the Council’s lack of cooperation in the discharge procedure has compelled Parliament to refuse
to grant discharge to the Secretary-General of the Council;
I. whereas the European Council and the Council, as Union institutions and as recipients of the general budget of the
Union, should be transparent and democratically accountable to the citizens of the Union and subject to democratic
scrutiny of the spending of public funds;
J. whereas the recommendation of the European Ombudsman (the ‘Ombudsman’) in strategic inquiry OI/2/2017/TE on
the transparency of the Council legislative process indicated that the Council’s practice with regard to transparency in
the legislative process constituted maladministration and should be addressed in order to enable citizens to follow the
Union legislative process;
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/res/2026/61/oj 1/3EN
OJ L, 13.1.2026
K. whereas the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union confirms the right of taxpayers and of the public
to be kept informed about the use of public revenue and that the General Court in its judgment of 25 January 2023 in
Case T-163/21(1), De Capitaniv Council, stated on transparency within the Union legislative process that documents
produced by the Council in its working groups are not of technical nature but legislative and are therefore subject to
access to documents requests;
1. Deeply regrets that since 2009, and again for the financial year 2023, Council continues to refuse to cooperate with
Parliament on the discharge procedure, preventing Parliament from taking an informed decision based on a serious
and thorough scrutiny of the implementation of the Council’s budget and thereby compelling Parliament to refuse
discharge;
2. Notes that on 20 September 2024, the relevant Parliament services, on behalf of the rapporteur for the discharge
procedure, forwarded a questionnaire to the Secretariat of the Council containing 90 important questions from
Parliament in order to enable a thorough scrutiny of the implementation of the Council budget and of the
management of the Council; further notes that similar questionnaires were sent to all other institutions, all of which
have provided Parliament with thorough answers to all questions;
3. Regrets that, on 23 September 2024, the General Secretariat of the Council informed Parliament once again that it
would not be answering Parliament’s questionnaire and that the Council would not be participating in the hearing
which was arranged for 12 November 2024 as part of the discharge procedure and in which all other institutions
that were invited participated;
4. Emphasises Parliament’s prerogative to grant discharge pursuant to Article 319 TFEU, as well as the applicable
provisions of the Financial Regulation and Parliament’s Rules of Procedure, in line with current interpretation and
practice, namely the power to grant discharge in order to maintain transparency and to ensure democratic
accountability towards Union taxpayers;
5. Underlines that Article 59(1) of the Financial Regulation states that the Commission shall confer the requisite powers
on the other Union Institutions for the implementation of the sections of the budget relating to them and, therefore,
finds it once again incomprehensible that the Council believes it appropriate that discharge should be granted to the
Commission for the implementation of the Council budget;
6. Stresses the well-established and respected practice followed by Parliament over the course of almost 20 years of
granting discharge to all Union institutions, bodies, offices and agencies; recalls that the Commission has declared its
inability to oversee the implementation of the budgets of the other Union institutions; stresses the reiterated view of
the Commission that the practice of giving discharge to each Union institution for their administrative expenditure
should continue to be pursued by Parliament;
7. Stresses that the current situation allows Parliament to check only the reports of the Court of Auditors and of the
Ombudsman as well as the publicly available information on the Council’s website, because the Council continues
its malpractice of non-cooperation with Parliament which makes it impossible for Parliament to carry out its duties
properly and make an informed decision on granting discharge;
8. Deplores that the Council, for almost 15 years, has shown a lack of political willingness to collaborate with
Parliament in the context of the annual discharge procedure; underlines that this attitude has had a lasting negative
effect on both institutions, has discredited the management and democratic scrutiny of the Union budget and has
damaged the trust of citizens in the Union as a transparent entity;
9. Reaffirms its deep frustration regarding the Council’s attitude towards the discharge procedure, which conveys an
inappropriate message to Union citizens at a time when greater transparency is essential; underlines that the Council
must adhere to the same standards of accountability it expects from other Union institutions;
(1) Judgment of the General Court of 25 January 2023, De Capitaniv Council, T-163/21, ECLI:EU:T:2023:15.
2/3 ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/res/2026/61/ojEN
OJ L, 13.1.2026
10. Emphasises that all other Union institutions acknowledge and comprehend the principle that, given the delegation of
power concerning budget implementation, Parliament holds both the right and the obligation to scrutinise their
budgets and their execution as part of the discharge procedure; in light of this, expresses its strong disapproval that
the Council persists in its refusal to cooperate with Parliament in this regard;
11. Recalls that the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union supports the right of taxpayers and the public
to be kept informed about the use of public revenues; demands, therefore, full respect for Parliament’s prerogative and
role as guarantor of the democratic accountability principle; calls on the Council to duly follow up on the
recommendations adopted by Parliament in the context of the discharge procedure;
12. Stresses that the current situation must be improved through better interinstitutional cooperation within the existing
framework of the Treaties; considers that a possible revision of the Treaties could make the discharge procedure
clearer and more transparent by explicitly empowering Parliament to grant discharge individually to all Union
institutions, bodies, offices and agencies and urges the Council to actively engage with Parliament to address the
current situation;
13. Notes that on 6 May 2025, during his intervention in Parliament’s plenary, the Representative of the Presidency of the
Council expressed the latter’s willingness ‘to engage in a meaningful and pragmatic cooperation between our
institutions’ when it comes to discharge in relation to the European Council and Council section of the Union
budget,and calls for this intention to be translated into concrete steps in due time; calls therefore on the Council to
resume negotiations with Parliament at the highest level as soon as possible, involving the Secretary-Generals and
the Presidents of both institutions, in order to break the deadlock and find a solution while respecting the respective
roles of Parliament and the Council in the discharge procedure and ensuring transparency and proper democratic
control of budget implementation;
14. Stresses that Parliament’s observations concerning budgetary and financial management, internal management,
performance and internal control, human resources, equality and well-being, ethical framework and transparency,
digitalisation, cybersecurity and data protection, buildings, environment and sustainability, interinstitutional
cooperation and communication from its discharge resolution of 7 May 2025 are still valid;
15. Reiterates its regret that the budget of the European Council and the Council has not been divided into two clearly
separated budgets as recommended by Parliament in previous discharge resolutions in order to improve
transparency and accountability, not least concerning the European Council, given that it is currently impossible to
obtain reliable information regarding its costs; stresses the importance of reliable data for objective control; calls for
compliance with the recommendation of the discharge authority;
16. Strongly regrets the Hungarian government’s obstructive stance within the European Council; notes that ongoing
political deadlocks and insufficient progress on transparency reforms continue to undermine trust and the European
Council’s effectiveness; calls for targeted treaty reforms to enhance democratic decision-making and transparency
within the European Council;
17. Welcomes the decision to adopt conclusions supported by 26 Member States on the Union’s continued and
unwavering support for Ukraine’s independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity, as set out in European Council
document EUCO 16/25 adopted on 26 June 2025; regrets that such a course was necessary due to persistent vetoes;
calls for the development of alternative mechanisms to bypass vetoes in urgent matters, pending treaty changes to
improve decision-making efficiency and unity within the European Council; underlines that the Union’s budget for
2023 has already mobilised substantial resources to support Ukraine, and stresses the importance of ensuring that
future budgetary decisions reflect this strategic commitment;
18. Urges the Council to ensure that the Presidency of the Council is conducted strictly in line with Union law, principles
and the Union’s credibility; deplores the Hungarian government’s misconduct of the Presidency of the Council in
pursuing bilateral activities that contradict the Union’s fundamental values; strongly urges the Council to condemn
such conduct.
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/res/2026/61/oj 3/3