First time in the European Parliament: von der Leyen Commission - put to the test of the censure motion

Yesterday, the European Parliament debated the censure motion initiated by Gheorghe Piperea and supported by 75 more MEPs from the ECR, ID, Patriots for Europe and non-affiliated political groups. In the document submitted on 3 July 2025, the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, is accused of a lack of transparency, administrative irresponsibility and failure to respect democratic principles in the functioning of the European executive. This is the first time that such a censure motion has been debated and put to a vote in the European Parliament. The debate on the motion took place yesterday, and the vote will be held at the European Parliament's sitting on Thursday, 10 July.

In presenting the text of the motion of censure against the Commission led by Ursula von der Leyen, the initiator Gheorghe Piperea said: "The motion of censure is a constitutional instrument intended to strengthen democracy. It is not a problem, it is a chance for a solution. Today's motion speaks about serious facts and about crucial principles violated. The lack of transparency and the violation of the authority of justice are proven by the decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the Pfizergate case, a decision that the European Commission chose not to execute. Recent reports by the European Court of Auditors speak about the inefficiency of spending public money from the Recovery and Resilience Mechanism. Bypassing the debate and decision in the European Parliament is the reason why the Parliament decided to sue the Commission at the Court of Justice of the European Union, a unique fact in history. Over the last six years, the Commission has abusively taken over powers from the Member States, violated the separation of powers and bypassed the European Parliament in its decisions. major. The undemocratic concentration of decision-making in the hands of the President of the European Commission is contrary to the principle of balance and distribution of power. The decision-making process has become opaque and discretionary and today raises issues of abuse and corruption. The cost of the European Union bureaucracy's obsession with issues such as climate change has been enormous. Economically, bankruptcies of ordinary people and entrepreneurs have increased and risks of sovereign bankruptcy of European Union member states have emerged. The fragmentation of the single market and double standards have deepened the gap between the regions of the European Union. Example: the little money from the PNRR that Romania has managed to attract goes on imports, and not on Romania's sustainable development. Out-of-control migration has set off social bombs. The burden of taking in migrants is shifting to less developed states; what is happening now on the German-Polish border is a scandal, but will soon become a habit. While poverty and educational regression have become dangerous, some of the decision-makers and their trading partners have lost their integrity, if they have ever had. The fear industry is one of the most profitable businesses in the world and that is why fear spread faster than Covid. While most of us were suffering, others were increasing their fortunes. It is not crises that destroy the world, but the greed of those who monetize them.”

In his defense, Ursula von der Leyen stated: "What I heard from Mr. Piperea is quite clear. It is practically a recipe from the textbook of extremism: polarizing society, undermining trust in democracy, with false accusations of interference in elections, an attempt to rewrite history, a history that shows us that Europe managed to overcome the pandemic well. Of course, we can join Mr. Piperea on the path of conspiracy, embrace the idea of these plots that he attributes to Brussels, or we can understand what is actually happening: that we are witnessing yet another ordinary attempt to try to divide the European institutions. We cannot let this happen. We will never let this happen.”

The President of the European Commission recalled what happened during the pandemic and about the financial effort made by the European Union to support the member states, but also about the measures taken subsequently. Ursula von der Leyen's speech was interrupted by protests from MEP Diana Şoşoacă, who was vehemently told to calm down by Roberta Metsola, the President of the European Parliament.

"The claims that I acted against the interests of the European Union are completely wrong. The negotiations on the vaccines were carried out jointly by the representatives of the Commission and the representatives of the EU Member States. Every contract that was negotiated was analyzed in detail, in the capitals of the Member States, before being signed by each of the 27 Member States. There were no secrets, there were no hidden clauses, no hidden obligations for the Member States. All 27 Member States decided to buy their vaccines, they freely chosen, of their own free will. So any member state that says they did not know the prices or what the contract contained is dishonest. Anyone who claims this is lying”, Ursula von der Leyen also said about the allegations in connection with the Pfizergate scandal.

In support of her party colleague, Manfred Weber, the EPP president said: "We are wasting time with this motion of censure, especially since Putin likes everything his friends do here. We know that the AfD in Germany and the AUR in Romania are playing Vladimir Putin's games. (...) The EPP has a very clear red line: pro-Europe, pro-Ukraine, pro-rule of law. That is why the EPP will vote unanimously against this motion of censure”.

For their part, the Alliance of Socialists and Democrats reiterated through its president Iratxe Garcia Perez: "This motion initiated by the far right will not receive the support of my political group. Not because we fully defend the actions of the European Commission, but because we will never vote with those like Viktor Orban, Marine Le Pen and others who want to destroy the European Union. This motion is not one of oversight of the European Union but is intended to be a blow to the heart of the Union. And we will defend European values in the face of such a motion”.

If the representatives of the Patriots for Europe political group stated that their deputies would vote for the motion of censure, we also recorded a bizarre situation on the part of the European Conservatives and Reformists, of which AUR is a member.

Nicola Procacini, co-chair of the ECR political group, stated: "I consider this motion a mistake, a great gift for our political opponents, which comes exactly at the moment of their maximum frustration. There may be freedom of vote within the ECR, but this motion is doomed to failure and you know very well that it is so, because it does not even come close to the threshold of votes necessary to be adopted. (...) I will vote against this motion, because I do not want to return to wild migration, to environmentalism as a substitute for communism, because I want to defend the work of the former president of the ECR, the current vice-president of the European Commission, Raffaele Fitto, who is today the vice-president of the European Commission”.

In contrast, Valerie Hayer, head of the Renew Europe political group, said: "I remind Mr Procacini that half of the ECR group abandoned him and signed this motion. In the Patriots for Europe group, we know that they want to destroy Europe. What kind of world do these people live in? (...) We did not sign this motion of censure and I hope that this is understood as it should be.”

The representative of the Greens group, Bas Eickhout, pointed out: "This motion should be about transparency, about fighting corruption, etc. But corruption starts from the far right because most corruption cases come from there and I find it incredible that the scandals that broke out when the representative of the Patriots for Europe was in charge of Frontex are not mentioned. The far right has blocked any initiative regarding transparency in this Parliament, and when there were problems, we, the Greens, sued the Commission for the transparency of contracts. Where were you then? All this shows that the motion is a big political spectacle staged by the far right to undermine democracy and Europe."

The signatories of the motion accused the Commission of a lack of transparency in its negotiations with Pfizer for the purchase of COVID-19 vaccines, focusing on the refusal to access text messages between the Commission President and Pfizer's CEO, considered essential for understanding decisions that involved spending tens of billions of euros of public funds. This is in addition to the harsh criticism made by the European Court of Auditors, which in a recent report highlighted serious shortcomings in the implementation mechanism of the Recovery and Resilience Facility, as well as systemic risks such as double funding and the lack of rigorous checks on the use of funds.

In addition to these financial aspects, the motion of censure also denounces a series of institutional slippages, such as the unjustified use of Article 122 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to substantiate a defense financing program worth 150 billion euros, a program that would exceed the purpose of this article intended, essentially, for interventions in economic emergency situations. The European Commission is accused in the text of the motion of having hijacked the meaning of the legal provisions in order to impose its strategic agenda without any real consultation of the Parliament, thus seriously affecting the institutional balance of the Union.

Another aspect recorded in the motion of censure by the signatories refers to the fact that the European Commission would have had direct interference in the electoral processes in some member states, such as Romania and Germany, by the distorted application of the Digital Services Regulation. The authors of the motion claim that the regulation, designed to protect consumers online, has been misused to restrict voting and even annul election results, which is contrary to the fundamental principles of national sovereignty and European democracy.

Overall, the text of the motion states that all these actions and omissions by the Commission profoundly undermine citizens' trust in the European institutions, compromise good governance and distort the spirit of the treaties on which the European Union is founded. The signatories of the motion therefore call on the European Parliament plenary to withdraw its confidence in the current Commission, considering that it has lost its legitimacy to lead the European Union in accordance with the principles of transparency, accountability and respect for the rule of law. The vote on the motion of censure will be held at the European Parliament's sitting on Thursday, 10 July.