A closely contested vote on whether to refer the free trade agreement between the European Union and Latin American countries to the European Court of Justice ended in victory for opponents of the agreement with 334 votes.
The EU, headed by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, signed its largest trade pact in history in Paraguay on 17 January after 25 years of negotiations. According to the agreement, it eliminates tariffs on the majority of bilateral trade and benefits European exports of cars, wine and cheese, while easing the entry of South American beef, poultry, sugar, rice, honey and soybeans into Europe.
However, the implementation of the agreement has faced fierce opposition. The negotiation process and subsequent signing of the agreement led to widespread protests in France, Poland and Ireland. Farmers fear competition from lower food prices and the quality of goods, as production standards in South America are less stringent than in the EU.
Mass protests involving thousands of farmers and many politicians from different countries also took place in Strasbourg on Tuesday and Wednesday, the city where the European Parliament voted to conduct a legal review of the trade deal, which could seriously delay or even derail the deal. In a close vote on Wednesday, lawmakers voted 334 to 324 in favour of a request for the European Court of Justice to determine whether the deal, supported by most EU countries and the European Commission, complies with the Union’s policies.
On the other hand, according to the Commission President, who warmly welcomed the agreement between the parties, considering it strategically important for Europe, the Parliament’s decision risks undermining the Union’s reputation as a reliable partner.
Supporters of the agreement see the agreement as a significant opportunity for European industries and a way to strengthen the EU’s geostrategic position, especially during ongoing friction with the US at a time when Donald Trump is threatening some countries with 200% tariffs on goods. In addition, the agreement eliminates tariffs on 91% of goods from the EU and 92% of goods from South America, saving European companies around €4–4.5 billion per year in customs duties.
In accordance to the agreement, exports from European Countries to South America would grow by 39%, especially from Germany, whose economic situation means it is particularly keen on the agreement. On top of that, South American countries got preferential access to the EU market for their agricultural products under the deal, while exports of European delicacies could go up by 50%. Of particular note is ensuring the EU’s access to critical raw materials for the “green transition,” thereby reducing dependence on China.
The European Court of Justice must now issue a ruling on whether its provisions restrict the EU’s ability to establish policies in the areas of environmental protection and consumer health. Usually, such a ruling takes approximately two years to issue, and the decision may necessitate amendments to the agreement.
Response to the Parliament’s decision
The Parliament’s decision has drawn a heated and ambiguous response from both the EU and South America, raising doubts about the EU’s reliability as a trustworthy partner.
European Commission trade spokesman Olof Gill told reporters that “The questions raised in the motion by the parliament are not justified because the commission has already addressed those questions and issues in a very detailed way.”
The President of the European Commission warned that the pause sends the “wrong signal” to international partners. In her words, the EU’s inability to finalise the deal undermines confidence in Europe as a stable trading ally and opens the door to South America for other global players. She appealed to MERCOSUR countries not to pull out of the negotiation process. Von der Leyen stressed that the EU remains committed to the agreement and will use the time of the court proceedings to “clarify technical details” so that by the time the court reaches a decision, the deal will be fully ready to launch.
“This moment of global change is fraught with dangers. And Europe must be ready to change even faster. To become more independent. For its own future,” she said.
For the President of the European Commission, the vote was not the last test. Today, she is facing the fourth vote of no confidence in the European Parliament in six months, a number considered unprecedented in the history of the EU. The motion criticises her approach to agricultural policy and is seen by the farming community as a betrayal of interests.
“I call on all MEPs, and first and foremost the French MEPs, who are committed to protecting the agricultural sector, to join forces behind our motion of censure in order to put an end to the European Commission’s excesses,” Patriots for Europe President Jordan Bardella said during a press conference on Wednesday.
German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, who has been one of the more enthusiastic supporters of ratifying the agreement in the face of recent months’ friction, also lashed out at the parliamentary vote almost immediately after it came through, calling for the pact to be implemented. Merz posted on his X account:
“The decision of the European Parliament on the Mercosur agreement is regrettable. It misjudges the geopolitical situation. We are convinced of the legality of the agreement. No more delays. The deal must now be implemented provisionally.”
Supporters of referring the agreement to the courts have also not remained silent, hailing the parliament’s decision as a sign of justice and a continuation of the opposition to the European Commission.
Marine Le Pen and her National Rally (RN) party are among the most vocal opponents of the agreement, considering it a “death sentence” for French agriculture and a symbol of “Brussels’ dictatorship.” According to Le Pen, the agreement will turn Europe into a “dumping ground for low-quality products,” destroying environmentally friendly French production. After the results of the vote, she stated:
“Congratulations to all the Members of the European Parliament who made it possible to suspend the agreement with Mercosur. Doing justice to our farmers and opposing free trade agreements is an essential part of our patriotic commitment.”
Jean-Luc Mélenchon, president of the Institut La Boétie, welcomed the results: “Victory! The EU-Mercosur agreement will be suspended thanks to the defiant resolution adopted today in the European Parliament! The European Commission has already stated that it “regrets the vote.” However, it will have to be respected, Ms Von der Leyen!”
The European People’s Party and the Socialists and Democrats, the largest groups in parliament, defended the deal and voted against. But in both political groups, some MEPs challenged the group line. The European Conservatives and Reformists allowed their lawmakers to vote freely, and a split occurred: Polish and French MEPs voted in favour of referral, while Italian, Czech, Belgian and Baltic MEPs voted against.
Ewa Zajączkowska, a Polish politician and member of the 10th European Parliament who is openly critical of the European Commission, was personally present at the protests in Strasbourg and stated:
“The vote was won by a margin of 334 to 324, i.e. by 10 votes! Many MEPs who usually defend the European Commission and Ursula von der Leyen did not side with her today, clearly seeing how scandalously this agreement was pushed through. The pressure from the EU pseudo-elite was not enough this time, because the case is extremely scandalous! We all saw that the agreement with MERCOSUR was pushed through in violation of EU treaties, and common decency requires that the ECJ issue a legal opinion! We do not want our agriculture to be destroyed in the name of Germany’s interests, we do not want our market to be flooded with toxic products containing banned chemicals and our food security to be undermined!”
Jorge Buxadé, Member of the European Parliament from Spain, VOX party member, was one of the main initiators of the legal blockade of the agreement and one of those who proposed to request the opinion of the European Court of Justice on the compatibility of the EU-Mercosur agreement with EU treaties. He said:
“VICTORY! The European Parliament has approved a request to the CJEU to rule on the legality of the Mercosur agreement, as requested by VOX and Patriots. This appeal could lead to its suspension for months or years until a decision is reached.”
Farmers’ unions also hailed the Parliament’s decision to suspend the agreement. France’s Coordination Rurale posted an extensive statement on its Facebook account:
“The Rural Areas Coordination Committee (CR) welcomes the European Parliament’s initiative to review the ratification process for the Mercosur agreement. This appeal represents the first victory achieved thanks to the exemplary mobilisation of the country’s agricultural sector. However, this does not automatically suspend the provisional application of the trade part of the agreement. The CR calls for maximum vigilance regarding the trade implications for French agriculture. We demand that the European Commission respect the Strasbourg decision and refrain from applying the trade part so as not to jeopardise democracy.”
As for the other side of the agreement, the MERCOSUR countries, the decision came as unpleasant news, undermining the benefits for both sides. European supporters of the agreement fear that South American countries will shift their attention to China or other regions, considering the EU an unreliable partner. Businesses in these countries, having already begun planning exports to Europe under the new rules, find themselves forced to freeze investments.
