—

having regard to the Treaty on European Union (TEU), and in particular Articles 10, 14 and 17(7) thereof,

—

having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), and in particular Articles 20 and 22 thereof,

—

having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, and in particular Articles 21, 39 and 52(1) thereof,

—

having regard to the Declaration on Article 17(6) and (7) of the Treaty on European Union annexed to the Final Act of the Intergovernmental Conference which adopted the Treaty of Lisbon,

—

having regard to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and in particular Article 21 thereof,

—

having regard to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and in particular Article 25 thereof,

—

having regard to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), and in particular Article 29 thereof,

—

having regard to the European Pillar of Social Rights, and in particular its principle 1,

—

having regard to Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2018/994 of 13 July 2018 amending the Act concerning the election of the members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage, annexed to Council Decision 76/787/ECSC, EEC, Euratom of 20 September 1976 (1),

—

having regard to European Council Decision (EU) 2018/937 of 28 June 2018 establishing the composition of the European Parliament (2),

—

having regard to Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2018/767 of 22 May 2018 fixing the period for the ninth election of representatives to the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage (3),

—

having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/673 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 May 2018 amending Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1141/2014 on the statute and funding of European political parties and European political foundations (4),

—

having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2019/493 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 March 2019 amending Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1141/2014 as regards a verification procedure related to infringements of rules on the protection of personal data in the context of elections to the European Parliament (5),

—

having regard to the Framework Agreement on relations between the European Parliament and the European Commission, as amended (6),

—

having regard to its resolution of 11 November 2015 on the reform of the electoral law of the European Union (7),

—

having regard to its resolution of 16 February 2017 on improving the functioning of the European Union building on the potential of the Lisbon Treaty (8),

—

having regard to its resolution of 16 February 2017 on possible evolutions of and adjustments to the current institutional set-up of the European Union (9),

—

having regard to its resolution of 18 April 2018 on the draft Council decision fixing the period for the ninth election of representatives to the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage (10),

—

having regard to its resolution of 7 February 2018 on the composition of the European Parliament (11),

—

having regard to its decision of 16 July 2019 on the election of the President of the Commission (12),

—

having regard to its resolution of 10 October 2019 on foreign electoral interference and disinformation in national and European democratic processes (13),

—

having regard to its resolution of 13 February 2019 on the state of the debate on the Future of Europe (14),

—

having regard to its decision of 18 June 2020 on setting up a special committee on foreign interference in all democratic processes in the European Union, including disinformation, and defining its responsibilities, numerical strength and term of office (15),

—

having regard to the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) information report of 20 March 2019 on the real rights of persons with disabilities to vote in European Parliament elections,

—

having regard to the work of the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) on gender equality, in particular its Plan of Action for Gender-sensitive Parliaments,

—

having regard to Rule 54 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs (A9-0211/2020),

A.

whereas the 2019 European elections registered the highest turnout of any elections to the European Parliament in the last 20 years, with 50,66 %, (an increase of eight percentage points compared to 2014), sending a positive signal that European citizens are taking an increasing interest in developments at EU level and that they believe that EU legislation has an impact on their daily lives; whereas, however, that figure masks wide disparities between the Member States, the abstention rate remained high and more must therefore be done to increase participation in European elections;

B.

whereas the results of the Eurobarometer survey commissioned by Parliament after the 2019 European elections show that the state of the economy and the environment were the two main priorities for voters, which clearly indicates that citizens who took part in the European elections wish for more action at EU level in these two policy fields, for which competence is shared between the EU and national authorities (16);

C.

whereas the right choice of electoral system creates the right environment for citizens to believe in their basic democratic right to vote for their democratic representatives and, at the same time, for political representatives to listen to their voters and represent their interests, and as such creates self-efficacy among citizens;

D.

whereas according to the Eurobarometer survey, the higher turnout was in part due to the increased participation of young people, although people in the over-40 age group are still much more likely to vote; whereas more than 50 % of young people voted out of a sense of civic duty and in response to the climate emergency;

E.

whereas the relentless engagement of civil society played a crucial role in pro-European discourse ahead of the European elections;

F.

whereas the higher turnout was also linked to gains by pro-European parties receiving votes from younger generations, which added to the pro-European majority in the European Parliament, but the results of Eurosceptics, populists and nationalist movements, which threaten the EU integration project, should be taken as a warning;

G.

whereas the higher turnout is also a sign that EU citizens want the EU to act swiftly, democratically and effectively on important matters such as employment, the cost of living, social dumping, climate change, migration, the protection of fundamental rights and democratisation;

H.

whereas we need to be more efficient and proactive in taking advantage of all means of communication, including digital technology, to foster a strong link between political decisions taken at EU level and constituents’ sense of connection to EU institutions;

I.

whereas while gender equality among Members of the European Parliament has improved (41 % women in 2019, up from 37 % in 2014), a gender-balanced Parliament has not yet been reached; whereas these figures mask significant differences between Member States and the many challenges still to be overcome if gender parity is to be achieved;

J.

whereas Ursula von der Leyen is the first female President of the European Commission; whereas 13 of her Commissioners are women, representing the largest share of female Commissioners in history;

K.

whereas Europe’s diverse and multicultural society needs to be better represented in the European Parliament;

L.

whereas 15 Member States still restrict voting rights for people with disabilities, thus preventing the meaningful participation and representation of these citizens in democratic processes; whereas as a result of national rules, an estimated 800 000 EU citizens were not able to exercise their right to vote in the last European elections because of their disabilities or mental health problems;

M.

whereas demographic change and the ageing of our societies are factors which will increase the number of people resident in long-term care establishments and hospitals; whereas the wider use of the specific, formal arrangements made for such people in many Member States should be encouraged;

N.

whereas the deadline for registering on the electoral roll varies greatly from one Member State to another, ranging from 90 days to 3 days prior to elections; whereas the EESC information report on the real rights of persons with disabilities to vote in European elections recommends that electoral rolls be closed at the earliest two weeks before elections are held;

O.

whereas according to a joint report drawn up by the European Federation of National Organisations Working with the Homeless (FEANTSA) and the Fondation Abbé-Pierre (17), there are at least 700 000 homeless people in the EU and almost 9 million households live in severely inadequate housing; whereas that figure has increased by 70 % in the space of 10 years; whereas it is very difficult for homeless people to vote;

P.

whereas the reform of the Electoral Act of 1976, as adopted by the European Parliament in its legislative resolution of 4 July 2018 on the draft Council decision amending the Act concerning the election of the members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage, annexed to Council Decision 76/787/ECSC, EEC, Euratom of 20 September 1976 (18), is still not fully ratified by three Member States;

Q.

whereas Parliament should pursue its proposals for amendments to the Electoral Act, still pending ratification by some Member States, with renewed vigour and push for unified European electoral rules;

R.

whereas the outcome of the 2019 European elections has led to the emergence of a new parliamentary majority composed of different political groups with a clear pro-European identity;

S.

whereas the 2019 elections failed to culminate in the choice of a Commission President from among the various Spitzenkandidaten as a result of the Council’s opposition, which resulted in reduced trust in the process; whereas the election of the Commission President depends on securing the support of the majority of Members of the European Parliament; whereas only some of the EU citizens who took part in the European elections believed that their vote could make a difference when it came to the election of the President of the Commission, highlighting the need to raise awareness of the process among EU citizens;

T.

whereas the Spitzenkandidaten process has yet to be fully developed; whereas it lacks, among other things, the possibility for Spitzenkandidaten to stand as official candidates, which would enable all European voters to vote for their preferred Spitzenkandidat and to be aware of who the candidates to the presidency of the Commission are and how they were chosen by European political parties; whereas Parliament raised this issue in its decision of 7 February 2018 on the revision of the Framework Agreement on relations between the European Parliament and the European Commission (19);

U.

whereas the Spitzenkandidaten system needs to be reformed as a matter of urgency through in-depth reflection at the Conference on the Future of Europe, by taking into account the proportional nature of the European electoral system, and must be ready to be applied at the next European elections in 2024; whereas this reflection should also include the de facto political role of the Commission and its President and any related changes to the decision-making process of the Union;

V.

whereas the fact that only 8 % of survey respondents said that they voted in the last elections in order to influence the choice of the next Commission President (20) underlines that the process of the selection of the President of the Commission needs to be clarified as a matter of urgency and to be made more transparent to voters;

W.

whereas institutional proposals such as transnational lists, as mentioned by Parliament in its resolution of 7 February 2018 on the composition of the European Parliament, placing European political parties and movements more at the centre of the European elections, the transformation of the Council into a second legislative chamber of the Union, as proposed in its resolution of 16 February 2017 on possible evolutions of and adjustments to the current institutional set-up of the European Union, or the introduction of the possibility for European political parties and movements to form pre-electoral coalitions could help to transform the European elections into a single European election, as opposed to the collection of 27 separate national elections that it is today;

X.

whereas the process of the examination of the declarations of interests and the hearings of the Commissioners-designate by the European Parliament was an important step in increasing the Commission’s accountability to Parliament and the public in general; whereas this process can and should be further improved in the future;

Y.

whereas democratic processes at both Member State and EU levels have been targeted by foreign powers, sometimes in connection with internal actors, in order to influence the outcome of elections and weaken the Union; whereas the mechanisms put in place by the EU institutions, such as the Code of Practice against Disinformation and the Rapid Alert System for elections, contributed to the mitigation of foreign interference during the election campaign;

Z.

whereas the Commission’s requests to social media platforms ahead of the elections created confusion and had unintended consequences such as the ban on Europe-wide political advertisements, which is one of the main instruments for European political parties to be identified and recognised by voters during European election campaigns; whereas especially on that matter, the institutions should develop an interinstitutional approach in order to have a positive impact on the security and stability of the electoral process; whereas the Code of Practice is purely voluntary and focuses on transparency rather than actual limits such as on targeted political advertisements;

AA.

whereas European political parties and foundations are the facilitators of successful European political debate, both during and beyond European elections, and should be rendered more visible; whereas, by virtue of this important role, European political parties and political foundations should ensure maximum financial transparency on the funds they manage, particularly on funds from the EU budget;

AB.

whereas European political parties face various restrictions to campaigning during European elections, including the limited possibility for campaign financing and shared activities with their national member parties, and are prohibited from campaigning in national referendums on European matters;

AC.

whereas the emergence of new political parties and movements ahead of the European elections has shown citizens’ interest in political innovation;

AD.

whereas diverging national rules for establishing parties and accessing the European elections remain a significant obstacle to political innovation and to creating true pan-European political debate;

AE.

whereas it has been reported that due to the organisation of voter registration in the UK, around a million European citizens were deprived of the possibility to exercise their right to vote in the European elections;

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

34.

35.