On June 25, 2025, the European Parliament’s legal affairs committee (JURI) recommended taking the European Commission to court due to its bypassing the parliament in establishing a €150 billion loan program aimed at enhancing defense spending across the EU. In a secret ballot, the move was supported by a significant majority—20 out of 23 votes in favor. This recommendation now hinges on Roberta Metsola, the President of the European Parliament, who must decide on the future course of action. Earlier in May, Metsola had cautioned Commission President Ursula von der Leyen about the potential for legal action if the Commission did not revise the legal foundation it had used to initiate the SAFE (Security Assistance for Europe) program.
The Commission justified its actions by invoking Article 122 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). This article permits the European Commission to propose measures that member states can approve directly if certain severe difficulties arise, such as threats to supply chains or crises beyond their control. Despite the looming threat of legal action, the Commission persevered with its stance, resulting in member states approving the SAFE regulation shortly thereafter. The Commission maintained confidence in its legal rationale, asserting that Europe faces unprecedented security threats that warrant immediate and decisive action.
Under the SAFE program, the European Commission is set to raise €150 billion to lend to member states for defense innovations and investments. This initiative represents a critical component of the Commission’s ‘Readiness 2030’ proposal, which aims to mobilize substantial investments in defense across the EU before 2030. This urgency stems from intelligence reports suggesting that by the end of the decade, Russia might be prepared to launch attacks on European nations. Metsola’s concerns, expressed in her correspondence to von der Leyen, are rooted not in the proposal’s merits but in the potential infringement on democratic legitimacy that arises from the absence of parliamentary involvement in the legislative process.
The use of Article 122 TFEU is notable, as it has been previously employed by the Commission during the COVID-19 pandemic and to expedite approvals for renewable energy initiatives amid the energy crisis. However, Metsola’s emphasis on protecting the European Parliament’s legislative and oversight functions highlights the tension that can arise between swift governmental response and adherence to democratic processes. The underlying fear is that proceeding with significant financial decisions without parliamentary input could erode foundational democratic structures.
To leverage the SAFE program, member states must develop and submit proposals detailing their intended projects. A notable stipulation requires that successful projects involve collaborations between at least two member states or a qualifying nation outside the EU. Moreover, an intra-European manufacturing requirement stipulates that two-thirds of project value must originate within Europe. This collaborative framework aims to promote unity and shared defense capabilities among member states.
Funding under the SAFE program is anticipated to commence in early 2026, marking a significant step in the EU’s collective defense strategy. As tensions grow in the geopolitical landscape, the balancing act between immediate action and maintaining democratic integrity within the EU continues to be a focal point. The outcome of Metsola’s decision will be closely watched as it may set a precedent for future interactions between European institutions and the governance of significant financial initiatives. The implications of this legal challenge could resonate far beyond the current context, influencing the dynamics of EU governance and legislative authority.
