"Recommendation on the European Commission’s compliance with ‘Better Regulation’ rules and other procedural requirements in preparing legislative proposals that it considered to be urgent (983/2025/MAS - the “Omnibus” case, 2031/2024/VB - the “migration” case, and 1379/2024/MIK - the “CAP” case)", 25 November 2025

The three cases concern how the European Commission applied its ‘Better Regulation’ rules and other procedural requirements when preparing legislative proposals concerning corporate sustainability due diligence..., countering migrant smuggling... and the Common Agricultural Policy... In two cases, the complainants also argued that the Commission failed to check the legislative proposals’ consistency with the EU’s climate goals, as required by the European Climate Law. In one case, the complainant was further concerned that the Commission breached its Rules of Procedure on inter-service consultations...

Based on her inquiries, the Ombudsman found a number of procedural shortcomings in how the Commission prepared the legislative proposals that, taken together, amount to maladministration.

In particular, the Ombudsman found that the Commission adopted a broad interpretation of ‘urgency’ and failed to sufficiently justify the ‘urgency’ of the legislative proposals towards the public and to document its derogations from the applicable Better Regulation rules...

To address these shortcomings, the Ombudsman made two recommendations...

1. The Commission should ensure a predictable, consistent and non-arbitrary application of the Better Regulation rules, by
   1. defining the notion of ‘urgency’ in the context of Better Regulation, possibly in the context of the rules’ upcoming revision;
   2. recording any internal decisions to exempt legislative proposals from the requirements of the Better Regulation rules, including who requested the exemption, on which grounds, and who granted it;
   3. clearly explaining in the explanatory memorandum accompanying its legislative proposals why a derogation was needed.
2. Where derogations are granted, the Commission should establish a procedure to ensure that the urgent preparation of legislative proposals still complies with the principles of a transparent, evidence-based and inclusive law-making process, as required by the Treaties and the case law of the EU courts. The Commission could do so in the context of the upcoming revision of the Better Regulation rules. To assist the Commission in this task, the Ombudsman also makes four suggestions below.