The Ordinary Legislative Procedure (Article 294 TFEU)

The ordinary legislative procedure (OLP) , codified in Article 294 TFEU, is the default legislative procedure of the European Union, applicable to over 80 legal bases across the Treaties. The procedure places the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union as co-legislators on an equal footing: both must agree on the text of proposed legislation for it to become law. Formerly known as the co-decision procedure (introduced by the Maastricht Treaty and simplified by the Amsterdam Treaty), the OLP was renamed and extended to become the standard legislative method by the Treaty of Lisbon. The procedure involves successive readings, possible conciliation, and, in practice, extensive use of informal trilogue negotiations.

Commission Proposal

The OLP begins with a proposal from the European Commission, which holds the near-exclusive right of legislative initiative under Article 17(2) TEU. The Commission’s proposal must set out the legal basis for the proposed act, explain the objectives, assess the likely economic, social, and environmental impacts, and demonstrate compliance with the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality. The Commission typically conducts extensive consultations with stakeholders, national experts, and the public before formulating a proposal. The Commission may withdraw its proposal at any stage of the procedure if it considers that the proposed amendments would distort the objectives of the legislation or that the legislation is no longer necessary.

The proposal is transmitted simultaneously to the European Parliament and the Council. National parliaments receive the proposal for review under the subsidiarity early warning mechanism (Protocol No 2). Where at least one-third of national parliaments (one-quarter for matters concerning the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice) object on subsidiarity grounds, the Commission must review the proposal and may decide to maintain, amend, or withdraw it — the so-called yellow card procedure. An orange card procedure applies where a simple majority of national parliaments object in the context of the ordinary legislative procedure and the Commission maintains its proposal, requiring the Commission, the Parliament, and the Council to give reasons for their positions.

First Reading

The European Parliament considers the Commission’s proposal in the relevant parliamentary committee, which appoints a rapporteur to lead the legislative work. The committee examines amendments, conducts negotiations with Council counterparts, and adopts a report that is voted on by the plenary. The Parliament adopts its position at first reading by simple majority, either accepting the Commission’s proposal without amendment or proposing amendments.

The Council examines the Parliament’s position alongside the Commission’s original proposal. The Council acts by qualified majority voting (QMV) for most legal bases, requiring at least 55 per cent of Member States (minimum 15) representing at least 65 per cent of the EU population. Unanimity is required for certain sensitive matters, including social security, tax harmonisation, and certain aspects of justice and home affairs. If the Council accepts the Parliament’s position, the act is adopted in the wording that corresponds to the Parliament’s position. This outcome — first reading agreement — occurs in approximately 75 to 80 per cent of legislative files.

Second Reading

If the Council does not approve the Parliament’s first-reading position, it adopts a Council position at first reading and transmits it to the Parliament with reasons. The Parliament has three months (extendable by one month) to consider the Council position. The Parliament may: approve the Council position or fail to act (the act is adopted); reject the Council position by an absolute majority of its component members (the act does not become law and the procedure ends); or propose amendments to the Council position by an absolute majority of its component members. Amendments must relate to the same subject matter as the Commission’s proposal.

If the Parliament proposes amendments, the Commission issues an opinion on each amendment. The Council then has three months (extendable by one month) to act. If the Council approves all the Parliament’s amendments, the act is adopted (second reading agreement). If the Council does not approve all amendments, the President of the Council, with the agreement of the President of the Parliament, convenes a Conciliation Committee.

Conciliation

The Conciliation Committee is composed of an equal number of representatives of the Council (one per Member State) and the Parliament (equal to the number of Council representatives), together with the Commission as a facilitator. The Committee has six weeks (extendable by two weeks) to agree on a joint text approved by a qualified majority of Council representatives and a majority of Parliament representatives. If the Committee cannot agree on a joint text, the act does not become law and the procedure ends.

If the Committee agrees on a joint text, the text is transmitted to the Parliament and the Council for third reading. The Parliament must approve the joint text by a simple majority within six weeks; the Council must approve it by qualified majority within the same period. If either institution fails to approve the joint text, the act does not become law. The Parliament’s rejection is final; the Council may not override the Parliament’s refusal.

Trilogues

In practice, the overwhelming majority of OLP files are resolved through trilogue negotiations — informal tripartite meetings between representatives of the Parliament (the rapporteur and shadow rapporteurs), the Council (the rotating Presidency), and the Commission. Trilogues operate throughout the legislative process, from early informal exchanges during the first reading to intensive negotiations before conciliation. The objective of trilogues is to reach early agreement, avoiding the need for second reading or conciliation. Trilogues have been criticised for their lack of transparency — negotiations occur behind closed doors and outcomes are presented to the Parliament and Council as take-it-or-leave-it packages — despite efforts by the institutions to improve transparency through public databases of trilogue documents and published four-column tables showing the evolution of positions.

Evolution from Co-Decision

The ordinary legislative procedure evolved from the co-decision procedure introduced by the Maastricht Treaty (Article 189b EC). The Maastricht version of co-decision gave the Parliament a veto but was limited in scope and included a complex third reading procedure that effectively gave the Council final decision-making power in areas of disagreement. The Amsterdam Treaty simplified the procedure by eliminating the third reading and making conciliation the final stage, and the Lisbon Treaty renamed it the ordinary legislative procedure and extended it to the majority of EU legislative competences. The evolution from consultation (where the Parliament merely gave an opinion) through cooperation (where the Parliament could propose amendments but could not veto) to co-decision (equal footing with the Council) represents the progressive democratisation of the EU legislative process.