The political debate over the Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive (UWWTD) remains ongoing despite court decisions rejecting industry cases. While the appeals were dismissed on procedural grounds due to a lack of legal status, Poland’s annulment action has been accepted by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU).
Polish MEP, Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska (EPP), has been involved in preparing the country’s case. Her expectation is that the process will last 18-30 months, during which time political pressure will be maintained. According to her, providing a clear Commission response to a possible mechanism to “stop the clock” on the implementation of the UWWTD is therefore essential.
“The rejection of the EFPIA case was purely procedural, so the court did not address the merits or evaluate the arguments on the directive itself,” she told Euractiv. “In practice, the decision does not close the political debate on the proportionality of the extended producer responsibility (EPR) mechanism or the reliability of the used impact assessment data.”
Directive under fire
Poland filed an annulment action (C-193/25) against the directive at the ECJ, arguing that it violates core EU principles. The government claims that the EPR scheme unfairly burdens pharmacy and cosmetics with 80% of the costs of treating micropollutants, violating the polluter pays principle and proportionality.
At the heart of Poland’s case is what it says is the Commission’s miscalculation of influence. Industry data show that pharma contributes <1% to wastewater toxicity (for EMA-compliant laboratory tests), contradicting models that attribute 58% to just four substances.
Costs have been underestimated 4-10 times (5-11 billion euros/year across the EU), cautions Kopeć i Medicines for Poland, jeopardizing access to medicines and competition.
The EPP postpones the debate
“The pharmaceutical and cosmetics sector does not challenge the principle of financing wastewater treatment or the idea of EPR,” Łukacijewska told Euractiv. They emphasize that the system should reflect the actual contribution of individual sectors to pollution and be based on proportionality. “They are willing to pay the costs, but only for substances that actually originate from their activities,” she added.
She underlined the need for clarity from the Commission on a possible “stop the clock” mechanism for the UWWTD. This would temporarily suspend implementation, allowing time for a new impact assessment and an accurate assessment of sectoral shares, ensuring that future rules are based on reliable data while maintaining proportionality.
The EPP group plans to submit an oral question to the Commission to trigger a plenary debate. “The most likely scenarios are now a place in the Brussels mini-plenary in March, or if the agenda space is insufficient, a move to the full plenary in April,” she said.
The group aims for the debate to culminate in a resolution, with drafting led by German MEP Oliver Schenk, a member of the public health and environment committees. The EPP considered it necessary to involve both committees, given the overlap of the topic between public health and environmental policy.
(VA, BM)
