Basically, the hope is that the Council rejects that amendment in its second reading (but right, the probability of this is not really high, since it codifies what was already true). I should have explained it better in my comment

> Second reading

> 7. If, within three months of such communication, the European Parliament:

> (a) approves the Council's position at first reading or has not taken a decision, the act concerned shall be deemed to have been adopted in the wording which corresponds to the position of the Council;

> (b) rejects, by a majority of its component members, the Council's position at first reading, the proposed act shall be deemed not to have been adopted;

> (c) proposes, by a majority of its component members, amendments to the Council's position at first reading, the text thus amended shall be forwarded to the Council and to the Commission, which shall deliver an opinion on those amendments.

> The Council decided Chat Control was on the agenda

The Council is different from the European Council (yes, the treaty drafters were not much creative in naming institutions), the latter is composed of the heads of states and sets the agenda like you said, while the former is composed on ministers in the policy area under discussion, and it's a "co-legislator" together for the Parliament (on most areas, including Chat Control 1.0 & 2.0, both must agree to pass an act).

The issue here (it's part of the "democratic deficits") is that, in its second reading, the EP needs an absolute majority to amend/reject the Council first reading, and a simple majority to approve it and pass it into law.

- Chat Control 1.0 (now expired): https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A...

- Chat Control 2.0: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:52...

In both cases you can read "Acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure", and it's not possible to adopt a different one, since it depends solely on the appropriate legal basis for the act.

In fact, both are based on Article 114 TFEU, which reads: "The European Parliament and the Council shall, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure and after consulting the Economic and Social Committee, adopt the measures for the approximation of the provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States which have as their object the establishment and functioning of the internal market."

> and, the part not said out loud, due to bypassing the EU commission makes country vetos null

The Commission is not an intergovernmental institution. The "veto rule" exists in areas where the Council - not the Commission - acts by unanimity, which is not the case for article 114 TFEU (and all acts under the ordinary legislative procedure, unanimity is present in (most) SLPs only).

The act can be approved only if and when the Council and Parliament approve the exact same text

The Commission can be dismissed by the Parliament, with a majority of its members and 2/3 of votes cast

https://igsg-marker.gitlab.io/

No, after the European Parliament has approved the proposed President of the European Commission and the Council has chosen the other 26 commissioners, the Commission as a whole is subject to another vote of confidence by the European Parliament.

They come in two forms: SPID (which is just username and password + TOTP, issued by private companies on behalf of the State, but allowing you to change your provider without becoming "a completely different person" [1]), and CIE (which is the new national ID card, and can be used as an electronic ID using any NFC reader). Additionally, some services allow to log in using equivalent eIDs from other EU countries [2].

[1] https://www.spid.gov.it/en/frequently-asked-questions/

[2] https://eid.gov.it/?lang=en-001