Why Does the European Parliament Meet in Strasbourg and Brussels?

The European Parliament has its legal seat in Strasbourg, but most of its day-to-day work happens in Brussels, and its administrative staff sit in Luxembourg. The arrangement is not an accident of convenience. It is written into a protocol attached to the EU treaties, and it can only be changed by the national governments, not by the Parliament itself.

This explainer sets out what the rules say, how they came about, how the courts have read them and why the question keeps returning to the political agenda.

What the treaty protocol says

The relevant text is Protocol No 6 on the location of the seats of the institutions, attached to the EU treaties. On the Parliament it says three things:

• the Parliament has its seat in Strasbourg, where the twelve monthly plenary sessions, including the budget session, are held;
• additional plenary sessions are held in Brussels;
• the Parliament’s committees meet in Brussels, and its General Secretariat and departments remain in Luxembourg.

The full wording can be read on EUR-Lex. In practice, according to the EU’s official institutions profile, plenary sessions are normally held in Strasbourg for four days a month, with some extra sessions in Brussels.

How the arrangement came about

No single decision created the three-city system, and the member states have never agreed to put every function in one city. Strasbourg is often described as a symbol of reconciliation between France and Germany, because the region around it changed hands between the two countries more than once. Supporters of the current system still use that argument.

The decisive step came at the Edinburgh European Council. On 12 December 1992 the governments of the member states agreed that the Parliament “shall have its seat in Strasbourg where the twelve periods of monthly plenary sessions, including the budget session, shall be held.” According to a Europeana exhibition on the Parliament’s history in Strasbourg, the Treaty of Amsterdam in 1997 wrote the rule into the treaties to give it greater force.

What the courts have said

Because the rule is so specific, it has been tested in court more than once.

The 1997 judgment

In 1995 the Parliament voted a calendar for 1996 that held eleven Strasbourg sessions and eight additional sessions in Brussels. France, supported by Luxembourg, challenged the vote. In case C-345/95, decided on 1 October 1997, the Court of Justice annulled the vote to the extent that it did not provide for twelve ordinary plenary sessions in Strasbourg. The Court’s press release says the governments had definitively decided to locate the seat in Strasbourg and could specify which activities must take place there. It accepted a derogation for election years.

The 2012 judgment

A later dispute concerned the calendars for 2012 and 2013. By tradition two plenary periods are held in Strasbourg in October, to make up for the lack of one in August. In 2011 the Parliament voted to drop one of the two four-day October periods and to split the other into two periods of two days, held in the same week. France, again supported by Luxembourg, brought the case (joined cases C-237/11 and C-238/11). In its judgment of 13 December 2012 the Court annulled the Parliament’s votes, holding that the two October periods, split in this way, could not each be regarded as a monthly plenary part-session. The Treaties require twelve monthly part-sessions in Strasbourg but do not prescribe how long each one lasts.

You can read the Court’s 1997 summary in its press release.

Why the Brussels sessions exist

The protocol allows additional plenary sessions in Brussels, and the Parliament uses them for votes that cannot wait for the next Strasbourg week. Committees, political group meetings and most meetings with the Commission and the Council also take place in Brussels, because those institutions are based there. Keeping the legislative negotiation close to the Council and the Commission is the main working reason for the Brussels role.

The result is a calendar in which Members and staff move between cities. That movement is the part critics point to most often.

The debate over a single seat

Arguments for a single seat usually concern cost, travel time and the environmental footprint of moving between cities. Arguments for keeping the current system concern the treaty obligation, the symbolism of Strasbourg and the interests of the host region. Estimates of the cost of the arrangement vary between sources and depend on what is counted, so they should be read with care.

In a 2013 resolution the Parliament called for the right to decide its own seat and committed itself to starting a treaty revision procedure to make that possible. A change would still need the agreement of all member state governments, including France, because the seats are fixed by the treaties and Article 341 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union leaves the choice of seats to the governments by common accord.

Frequently asked questions

Is Strasbourg or Brussels the capital of the European Union?

Neither is formally a capital. The treaties name several seats: Brussels for the Commission and the Council, Strasbourg for the Parliament, and Luxembourg for the Court of Justice and the Court of Auditors, among others.

How many plenary sessions must be held in Strasbourg each year?

Twelve, one in each month, including the one where the budget is adopted. The Court of Justice confirmed in 1997 that this is a binding requirement. Election years are handled differently, as the Court accepted.

Where do committees meet?

The protocol says the committees meet in Brussels. The Parliament’s institutional profile also lists 20 committees and three subcommittees, each covering a policy area.

Can the Parliament move itself to Brussels?

Not on its own. The seat is fixed by a treaty protocol, so a change needs the member states to agree and then ratify it.

Where this fits

The three-city pattern explains why Strasbourg appears in the title of so many records of Parliament’s votes and debates. For a look at what a plenary week contained in practice, see the plenary session notes archive.