The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) is to be asked to give its legal opinion on the controversial EU-Mercosur deal.

It follows a majority of MEPs at the European Parliament in Strasbourg yesterday (Wednesday, January 21) voting in favour of a motion to seek legal advice from Europe's top court.

The CJEU is being asked to consider if the EU Mercosur Partnership Agreement and Interim Trade Agreement are compliant with the Treaties of the EU.

This effectively delays the formal ratification of the deal until the legal advice is provided, with some sources stating that it could take 18-24 months.

Vote

334 MEPs voted in favour of referring the deal to the European courts, and 324 voting against. 11 MEPs abstained from voting at all.

9 of Ireland's MEPs voted in favour, four voted against and one was absent.

Although, Luke 'Ming' Flanagan was absent for medical reasons, he was one of the MEPs who signed the resolution proposing that the deal be referred to the ECJ.

The four Irish MEPs to vote against referring the Mercosur deal to the CJEU were: Barry Andrews (FF/Renew); Regina Doherty (FG/EPP); Sean Kelly (FG/EPP) and Maria Walsh (FG /EPP).

Mercosur

MEP Maria Walsh, who issued a video on social media following the vote, told Agriland that while voting against the motion was "not an easy decision", she firmly believes it was "the responsible one".

“This vote was not about whether Mercosur is a good deal, and voting against the referral does not mean I support Mercosur.

"As I have said many times, I do not support the EU-Mercosur trade agreement. But what I do want is for MEPs to finally have their say on Mercosur and reject the deal - and referring it to the ECJ delays that final decision by up to two years," the Midlands North-West MEP said in a statement.

"This specific vote was about whether Mercosur should be referred to the ECJ to examine the legality of splitting the deal into two parts.

"This practice - known as 'splitting' trade agreements - has been used several times before with no legal issues.

"It also opens the door to a scenario where the commission could implement the trade elements of Mercosur before elected MEPs have had the opportunity to vote on it.

"If the agreement is provisionally implemented, the safeguards which we worked hard to introduce might not even apply," she said.

Delay

MEP Barry Andrews, who also voted against the motion yesterday, told Agriland:

"This vote leads to another long delay for this trade deal, more uncertainty for farmers and, in my view, sends the wrong signal at precisely the wrong time.

"Europe needs all the friends it can get in the world these days and Latin America has the door open.

"This trade deal presents lots of opportunities for Irish businesses, for the dairy sector, for the alcohol sector, the pharma sector and others. Beef farmers have genuine concerns, but I feel those concerns are addressed in the safeguards," he added.

MEP Sean Kelly said that he regrets the outcome of yesterday’s vote to refer the Mercosur trade deal to the ECJ for an opinion.

However, he added that he respects the decision of the majority of MEPs.

"We now have to wait on the court to make its opinion known and the timeline is unclear. The full impact of today’s outcome is to be assessed," he said.

MEP Regina Doherty told Agriland: "Prolonging this process only adds to the uncertainty farmers are already facing in a fearful market".

"Politicians are elected to make decisions, and the sooner a clear decision is taken on this trade deal, one way or the other, the better it will be for farming families and rural communities who need to be able to plan with confidence," she added.