Brussels – The main instrument of participatory democracy, the European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI), is facing a crisis of accountability: the organisers of the “Stop finning – Stop the trade” initiative have lodged a formal complaint with the European Ombudsman against the European Commission, denouncing what they claim is a system that risks ignoring the will of millions of taxpayers.
The news was reported by the non-profit organisation The Good Lobby, which has challenged the way the procedures leading up to the initiative’s approval were handled, highlighting a series of alleged administrative shortcomings that would, in general, jeopardise the effectiveness of one of the most important instruments of direct democracy in the EU.
The appeal is based on three grounds. Firstly, it alleges a breach of the transparency obligations set out in the ECI Regulation, including the refusal to provide an up-to-date timeline of legislative proceedings and a lack of transparency in decision-making. Secondly, it alleges a failure to act within a reasonable timeframe, which may constitute a breach of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. Finally, it raises the issue of a systemic pattern in which the Commission tends to postpone or ignore citizens’ initiatives that have formally collected the required number of signatures. For these reasons, the organisers are asking the European Ombudsman to launch an inquiry and to recommend to the Commission that it “provide a clear and up-to-date timetable for the actions to be taken”; that it “make public an account of the commitments already made”; and that it “ensure that future initiatives of public interest are handled in a timely and transparent manner.”
The “Stop Finning” initiative, which has gathered almost 1.12 million verified signatures, aims to ban the trade in loose shark fins within the EU. Although the practice of “finning” is banned in European waters and vessels must land the animals with their fins naturally attached, the EU remains one of the world’s largest exporters and transit hubs for this market. According to the organisers, the extinction of sharks would seriously compromise the balance of marine ecosystems, oceanic oxygen production, and CO2 storage capacity.
In July 2023, the Commission had officially responded to the initiative committing to take action in three areas: assessing the possible adoption of a legislative measure to end the trade in loose shark fins, providing an impact assessment on the environmental, social, and economic consequences of implementing a “fins naturally attached” policy, and, finally, “examining, by the end of 2023, the best legal means to request
more detailed information to identify species of sharks and their respective products at
import and export. It will take a decision with a view to entry into force by 1st January 2025 at
the latest.” However, the organisers of the Initiative maintain that these deadlines have not been met: two and a half years after the official response, no concrete legislative proposal has yet been tabled.
The Stop Finning case does not appear to be an “isolated” one. The Good Lobby highlights how other European Citizens’ Initiatives are facing similar obstacles. The initiative “End the Cage Age” is cited; despite 1.4 million signatures and a formal commitment from the Commission in 2021, its legislative deadlines have been repeatedly postponed until 2026, leading the Citizens’ Committee to take the EU institution to court before the Court of Justice. Similarly, the “Fur Free Europe” initiative has denounced a breach of political equality, arguing that the Commission held closed-door seminars with the fur industry while ignoring the ECI organisers’ requests to meet. “Taken together, these cases raise fundamental questions about the effectiveness of the European Citizens’ Initiative as a democratic tool, designed to give citizens a direct voice in EU decision-making,” explains the non-profit organisation.
The European Ombudsman is an impartial body that investigates various forms of maladministration, including unfair behaviour, discrimination, abuse of power, failure or refusal to provide information, unjustified delays, and administrative irregularities. They initiate investigations upon receipt of a complaint and, in the course of their work, may request confidential documents, inspect files, and make recommendations for corrective action. The Ombudsman may resolve a particular issue simply by informing the institution concerned. If this is not sufficient, every effort is made to reach an amicable solution that rectifies the situation. If this proves unsuccessful, the Ombudsman may issue recommendations to the institution concerned. Finally, if these are not accepted, he may send a special report to the European Parliament so that it may take the appropriate measures.
English version by the Translation Service of Withub
