19/08/2025 Brussels, Belgium

In 2025, “resilience” and “preparedness” have been key topics of discussion at the European level, as the European Commission has published new reports, strategies and actions to help the EU face growing geopolitical and climate-based threats.

However, while improving EU resilience and preparedness is urgently needed, the likelihood of the European Commission matching its words with actions is becoming increasingly slim. In August 2025, it refused to take action against Member States which have not implemented the existing rules on resilience and safety in the European Electronic Communications Code (EECC), after being asked to do so by 10 Members of the European Parliament (MEPs). It also declined to explain how it expected its future rules on resilience to be taken seriously if Member States face no consequences for not complying with existing ones.

Seven years after the EECC entered into force, key public safety obligations on caller location (Article 109) and public warning (Article 110) remain unimplemented by several Member States, undermining public safety and resilience during crises. There have been no consequences for ignoring these rules, as the Commission has failed to fulfil its role as Guardian of the Treaties and enforce this legislation.

To address this issue, MEPs called on the Commission to clarify when it would take legal action against Member States for non-implementation of Articles 109 and 110 EECC.  The MEPs in question were Pascal Arimont (PPE, Belgium), Liesbet Sommen (PPE, Belgium), Željana Zovko (PPE, Croatia), Andrzej Buła (PPE, Poland), Lena Düpont (PPE, Germany), Joachim Streit (Renew, Germany), Hélder Sousa Silva (PPE, Portugal), Olivier Chastel (Renew, Belgium), Paulo Do Nascimento Cabral (PPE, Portugal), and Grégory Allione (Renew, France).

All ten MEPs hailed from the European Parliament’s Intergroup on Resilience, Disaster Management and Civil Protection.

The MEPs asked the Commission if it agreed that caller location and public warning could improve public safety and societal resilience, whether it would take legal action against Member States for failing to implement them, and if not, how it would ensure that future preparedness laws would be implemented effectively if Member States faced no consequences for ignoring them.

On 6 August, the European Commission responded by agreeing that both technologies are important for ensuring public safety, security and health. However, it refused to commit to taking action against non-compliant Member States. It also declined to address how it expects new rules to be taken seriously if Member States continue to treat rules on resilience and safety as voluntary. Instead, it claimed that it monitored the implementation of both technologies and would review the EECC in December 2025.

The dangers of monitoring EU rules without enforcing them are becoming clear in 2025. For example, earlier this month, Cyprus indicated that its lack of mobile-based public warning contributed to losses of life in its recent forest fires. The Commission’s claim that it monitors the implementation of public warning shows it was aware of this gap in Cypriot preparedness; its failure to take enforcement action to close this gap therefore reflects a deliberate decision to ignore it.

As fires rage across Southern Europe, geopolitical threats face its east and climate-based flooding affects its coast and river basins, the real-world cost of unimplemented resilience policies continues to grow. It’s time for the European Commission to move beyond rhetoric and take legal action to ensure its citizens are protected.