Continued discrimination and legal uncertainty as a result of the non-implementation of CJEU rulings

Question for written answer E-001046/2026
to the Commission
Rule 144
Raquel García Hermida-Van Der Walle (Renew)

Over the past few years, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has issued landmark judgments in the areas of freedom of movement and family life[1], legal recognition of transgender identity[2], and the protection of the human dignity of LGBTIQ+ people[3]. However, Member States have often not implemented the necessary changes in national legislation. As a consequence, LGBTIQ+ people's fundamental rights are still being violated in some Member States.

Now, the CJEU has ruled on the principle of legal gender recognition for people exercising their freedom of movement in the EU[4].

• 1.Does the Commission agree that its role as Guardian of the Treaties requires taking action against Member States that breach EU law and do not ensure judgments are implemented effectively and promptly, rather than merely 'monitoring the situation' in such cases? If so, can the Commission explain why the court rulings in footnotes 1, 2 and 3 have not been fully implemented yet?
• 2.Can the Commission provide an overview of the correspondence between the Commission and relevant Member State(s) for each of the court cases?
• 3.If the latest ruling is not directly implemented in the Member States, will the Commission show less hesitation and commit to directly and fully enforcing this CJEU ruling rather than only taking selective action?

Submitted: 12.3.2026

• [1] Judgment of the Court of Justice of 5 June 2018, Coman and others v Inspectoratul General pentru Imigrări and Ministerul Afacerilor Interne, C-673/16, ECLI:EU:C:2018:385; Judgment of the Court of Justice of 14 December 2021, V.M.A. v Stolichna obshtina, rayon 'Pancharevo', C-490/20, ECLI:EU:C:2021:1008; Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 4 October 2024, M.-A.A. v Direcția de Evidență a Persoanelor Cluj, Serviciul stare civilă, Direcția pentru Evidența Persoanelor și Administrarea Bazelor de Date din Ministerul Afacerilor Interne, Municipiul Cluj-Napoca, C-4/23, ECLI:EU:C:2024:845; Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 25 November 2025, Jakub Cupriak-Trojan, Mateusz Trojan v Wojewoda Mazowiecki, C-713/23, ECLI:EU:C:2025:917; Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 24 June 2022, Rzecznik Praw Obywatelskich, C-2/21, ECLI:EU:C:2022:502.
• [2] Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 13 March 2025, VP v Országos Idegenrendészeti Főigazgatóság, C-247/23, ECLI:EU:C:2025:172.
• [3] Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 26 June 2025, Makeleio and Zougla v Ethniko Symvoulio Radiotileorasis (ESR), Joined Cases C-555/23 and C-556/23, ECLI:EU:C:2025:484.
• [4] Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 12 March 2026, K. M. H. v Obshtina Stara Zagora, C-43/24, ECLI:EU:C:2026:183.