European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen won’t be present when the European Parliament discusses whether to remove her and her team from office.

On Monday, MEPs will debate a no-confidence motion brought against von der Leyen by the far-right Patriots for Europe group and its leader, Jordan Bardella, over her handling of the EU–Mercosur trade deal.

Von der Leyen has decided not to attend. She will instead be represented by Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič, a longtime ally, Parliament spokesperson Delphine Colard confirmed.

No other commissioners will be present at the debate in Strasbourg, according to two officials. A vote on the motion, which is all but certain to fail, will take place on Thursday.

During previous debates on censure motions, von der Leyen and her team of 26 commissioners turned out in force to project unity.

This time, the message is different: the Commission is no longer playing ball.

The shift reflects growing fatigue inside the Berlaymont at a parliamentary tool that was used three times against von der Leyen in the second half of 2025. Two of those motions were brought by the far right and one by the far left. All failed.

Support from just 72 of the Parliament’s 720 lawmakers is needed to trigger a motion of censure, and many lawmakers from the center-right European People’s Party, the Socialists and Democrats, and the liberals of Renew say the ease of launching censure motions has diluted their impact.

EPP spokesperson Pedro López de Pablo said these “useless efforts” to bring down the Commission “drive me to melancholy.”

“If you use this instrument not for its proper purposes, it will be bland by the time you actually need it,” said Vincent Stuer, spokesperson for Renew.

However, the Patriots hit back, with spokesperson Alonso de Mendoza saying: “It will be the last one if we win.”

MEPs and officials have floated the idea of increasing the threshold, but the Parliament’s leadership has so far resisted, wary of handing far-right groups a win by allowing them to frame any reform as institutional censorship.

A Commission spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment.