The European Union is considering a major overhaul of its internal rules as it prepares for the possibility of enlargement beyond 30 member states. At the heart of the reform is reducing the number of cases where a single country can block decision-making, including at certain stages of the accession process for candidate countries.
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen is expected to present the plan next week, which aims to adapt European institutions to a larger Union.
According to internal Commission draft documents reported by the “Rapporteur”, Brussels is considering the possibility of implementing the reform without opening the complex process of amending the Lisbon Treaty.
One of the instruments being discussed is the activation of so-called “passerelle clauses.” These existing treaty provisions allow for decisions in certain areas to no longer require unanimous support from all states, but to be taken by qualified majority.
Such a change would also have a direct impact on the enlargement process and, consequently, on candidate countries like Albania. The aim is that some intermediate decisions during the negotiations cannot be blocked by the opposition of just one or a few member states.
However, unanimity would not disappear completely from the process. According to the proposal, it would continue to be necessary at the time of opening and at the end of the accession procedure.
The transition to the new system itself also poses a political obstacle, as the activation of the “passerelle” clauses initially requires the unanimous approval of member states.
The Commission argues that the current way of functioning could become increasingly problematic as the number of members of the Union increases. The more countries sit at the decision-making table, the greater the possibility of delays and deadlocks.
A broader system of qualified majority voting could have an impact not only on enlargement, but also in other areas. The documents mention sanctions, security and defense policy, human rights, and measures against tax evasion.
Under the proposed scheme, the approval of a decision would require the support of at least 15 states, which together should represent approximately two-thirds of the EU population.
At the same time, national governments could be left with a safety mechanism. The so-called “emergency brake” would allow a state to seek intervention when it considers that a decision violates vital national interests.
The reform could be important for countries such as Albania, Ukraine, Montenegro and North Macedonia, as it aims to limit the possibility of political deadlocks during the intermediate stages of negotiations.
Another important change being discussed relates to the European Commission itself. Currently, each member state has one commissioner, but maintaining this formula is considered more difficult in an EU with over 30 members.
The draft foresees the possibility of only around two-thirds of the countries having a representative in the Commission at the same time. If such a formula were to be applied in the current 27-member Union, nine countries would not have their own commissioner during a given mandate.
This point is expected to be particularly sensitive for small states, which traditionally consider the presence of a national commissioner as an important element of their representation in European institutions.
Stronger rules are also being discussed for the period after the admission of new members.
According to the documents, countries that join the EU in the future could remain under a special monitoring mechanism for at least ten years. During this time, Brussels would be able to intervene in the event of serious problems with democratic standards, the rule of law or the functioning of institutions.
Measures could range from financial restrictions to the suspension of voting rights in the EU Council.
Also under discussion is a temporary and legally binding commitment for new members, through which they would pledge not to use their position to block decisions supported by the rest of the Union.
In parallel, the transitional periods that are still used today for certain fields, such as agriculture, justice, and internal affairs, would continue.
If the proposals go ahead, they would constitute a significant change to the way the EU operates ahead of the next wave of enlargement. However, some key elements require the agreement of all member states, so the final content of the reform will depend on negotiations between EU governments.