A group of European lawmakers has launched an initiative for a no-confidence vote against European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, claiming to have collected more than the required 72 signatures to formally submit the motion.
Although unlikely to pass, the censure motion could pave the way to broader consequences, replicating the path that led in the 1990s to the voluntary resignation of the EU executive led by Jacques Santer.
The move comes in response to a recent court ruling criticising von der Leyen’s lack of transparency in relation to the so-called “Pfizergate” scandal, as well as broader allegations of bypassing the European Parliament and centralising power within the Commission.
Romanian hard-right MEP Gheorghe Piperea announced he would submit the motion of censure this week, having gathered signatures from MEPs across at least three political groupings on the right and far-right spectrum: the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR), the Patriots, the European of Sovereign Nations group (ESN), as well as some non-affiliated members.
Despite participation from individual conservative MEPs, the initiative does not officially represent the ECR group, which includes Italy’s ruling party, Fratelli d’Italia, led by Giorgia Meloni. “ECR MEPs participating in this initiative are doing so on an individual basis,” a spokesperson clarified.
While the threshold to initiate a no-confidence vote is relatively low, the chances of removing von der Leyen and her Commission are slim. Such a motion requires a two-thirds majority in the 720-seat European Parliament.
“I hope other groups will join the motion, but I’m not naive,” Piperea told Euronews, acknowledging the unlikelihood of success.
The ‘Santer Commission’ precedent
That is not the direct aim however.
“Still, we could gather a couple hundred votes, which may trigger a broader debate among politicians and the public, possibly leading to her voluntary resignation,” said Piperea.
No-confidence votes are infrequent but historically significant in the European Parliament. In 1999, the entire European Commission, led by Jacques Santer, resigned amid fraud allegations and transparency issues, despite surviving a confidence vote.
Piperea, a lawyer by profession, said that even if the motion fails, it could serve as a valuable political tool.
“There seems to be an unwritten rule that the Commission, and von der Leyen in particular, cannot be held accountable for mistakes or failures. We must end this. In a democracy, there should be accountability, oversight, and responsibility.”
The primary driver behind the motion is the ongoing “Pfizergate” controversy, centred on von der Leyen’s refusal to disclose text messages exchanged with Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla during COVID-19 vaccine negotiations,
For this matter, the EU court recently ruled against her. The motion also criticises her handling of legislative affairs, including the withdrawal of environmental proposals without proper consultation with Parliament.
Unlikely perfect storm scenario
The court ruling has amplified criticism of von der Leyen across the political spectrum, with socialists, liberals, and greens voicing concern over her leadership and transparency. According to Piperea, socialist MEPs are also discontented with recent budget cuts to anti-poverty programs.
Nonetheless, the only scenario that could pose a real threat to von der Leyen would likely be a perfect storm, in which a wide range of political groups—including members of her own centre-right European People’s Party (EPP)—turn against her for different reasons.
The far-right origins of this initiative may deter broader support for it however.
A source from The Left group, which has been among the most vocal opponents of von der Leyen and previously filed its own motion of censure, expressed scepticism.
“Some delegations in our group are strongly committed to the cordon sanitaire and avoid cooperation with the ECR,” the source said.
“They’ve supported Commissioner Fitto during this mandate and didn’t back our earlier censure motion. This feels more like a communication stunt.”
Piperea acknowledged the ideological roadblocks. “Some groups aren’t fully opposed to the motion itself, but they hesitate simply because it’s coming from the right,” he said.
Read the full article here
