The Lisbon Treaty has given to the European Parliament the right to revise the rules on how its committees of inquiry operate. Under Article 226 TFEU the European Parliament may “set up a temporary Committee of Inquiry to investigate, without prejudice to the powers conferred by the Treaties on other institutions or bodies, alleged contraventions or maladministration in the implementation of Union law”. Unsurprisingly, the European Parliament wants to reinforce and to grant more powers to its committees of inquiry by repealing the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission Decision 95/167/EC, which laid down the detailed provisions governing the exercise of the European Parliament's right of inquiry, and replaced it by a new regulation. David Martin, a UK Labour MEP, has drafted an own-initiative report calling for strengthening powers for such committees.

The European Parliament may set up committees of inquiry at the request of one quarter of its component members. However, the MEPs believe that they have limited investigatory powers, consequently the current proposal, if adopted, would grant substantial investigatory powers to the European Parliament to look into alleged contraventions or maladministration of EU law. Under the European Parliament’s proposal, a committee of inquiry would be able to hear members of EU institutions and members of governments of Member States, obtain evidence from officials and other servants of the EU or of Member States, obtain evidence from any individual residing in the EU, request experts‘ reports, request documents and conduct on-the-spot investigations. The committee of inquiry may also ask national authorities for assistance in the course of its investigations and national parliaments to cooperate in the investigation.

The MEPs are therefore seeking new powers to conduct investigations, including the right to summon European commissioners and national politicians to give evidence, demand access to documents and the right to conduct on-the-spot investigations at EU and national level. It is important to note that the proposal goes well beyond what is allowed under the EU Treaties, which have not given to the European Parliament a right to summon witnesses and demand documents. This power grab is therefore unacceptable.

A committee of inquiry would be able to have access to any relevant documents in the possession of the EU's institutions or bodies, of Member States or any other natural or legal person. Hence, upon request of a committee of inquiry the EU's institutions and bodies, Member States‘ authorities or any other legal or natural person shall made available to the committee documents in their possession.

Under the European Parliament’s proposal, upon a request from a committee of inquiry, the EU institutions or governments of Member States shall designate one or more of their members to appear before the committee. Hence, MEPs would have the power to summon any UK's Government minister for questioning, which is unacceptable. A committee of inquiry would also be given the power to hear the Members of the Commission responsible for the issue under investigation if their testimony is considered to be necessary for a detailed appraisal of the matter under investigation.

Moreover, the EU's institutions and bodies as well as the Member States would be required to designate, in line with the principle of sincere cooperation, the officials whom they allow to appear before a committee of inquiry when the committee invites them to do so. The committee of inquiry may also summon a specific EU official or other servant to testify in a matter related with his/her professional duties.

A committee of inquiry would also have the right to request any individual who is resident in the EU to participate in a hearing before it. In this case, the committee would forward a request to the competent national authority of the Member State where the individual is resident, which, in accordance with the principle of sincere cooperation, would be required to summon the individual to appear before the committee. Moreover, under the draft proposal, committees of inquiry would also have the right to request witnesses to testify under oath.

The MEPs also want to set up sanctions against infringements of the draft regulation. Under the proposal, member states would be obliged to impose sanctions against those who refuse to provide any documents requested, refuse to appear before the committee and those who give false evidence or try and bribe individuals. Such sanctions “shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive” and “reflect the sanctions for corresponding infringements in relation to the work of committees of inquiry in the national parliaments.” A Member State would be, accordingly, required to bring “appropriate proceedings against the perpetrators” of the above-mentioned infringements and ensure that they are “subject to appropriate sanctions under their national law”.

It is important to note that if such regulation is adopted it would be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States, including the UK. The provisions governing the exercise of the right of inquiry shall be determined by the European Parliament acting by means of regulations on its own initiative, after obtaining the consent of the Council and the Commission. Hence, the Council and the European Commission have to give their consent, through an inter-institutional agreement, to the proposal for it to be adopted, and, fortunately, this is unlikely to happen. The member states as well as the European Commission are unwilling to give MEPs greater investigatory powers. In fact, according to the EuropeanVoice, "The legal services of the Commission and the Council both believe that Martin's reforms go well beyond what the treaty allows and would violate the EU's staff regulation.

The European Parliament has recently adopted a proposal for a regulation on the detailed provisions governing the exercise of the European Parliament's right of inquiry, but decided to postpone the vote on the motion for a resolution, so it could have more time to negotiate with the member states and the European Commission.