The European Commission decided on February to refer the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) to the European Court of Justice (ECJ), trade commissioner Karel de Gucht said in a statement.

In recent weeks, several voices in Brussels have supported the idea, including justice and fundamental rights commissioner Viviane Reding and the Liberal and Democrat group in the European Parliament (ALDE), which is yet to take a stance on ACTA.

"I am glad to say that this morning my fellow Commissioners have discussed and agreed in general with my proposal to refer the ACTA agreement to the European Court of Justice. We are planning to ask Europe’s highest court to assess whether ACTA is incompatible - in any way - with the EU's fundamental rights and freedoms, such as freedom of expression and information or data protection and the right to property in case of intellectual property," De Gucht said.

It was not immediately clear when the EC would make a formal referral, nor whether the Commission's decision would alter ACTA's ratification process. European Parliament's international trade committee is scheduled to "hold a first exchange of views on ACTA with the European Commission" on March 1.

Should European Parliament reject ACTA (a vote is expected no sooner than June), it would invalidate the European Union's participation as a signatory party, releasing EU member states from any obligation to ratify the treaty.

After 22 EU member states signed ACTA in Tokyo in late January, rallies in dozens of European cities and towns protested against ACTA, which internet freedom groups say opens the door for tight policing of online content.

More than 100 000 across Europe have joined concerted anti-ACTA protests on February 11. Activists have called for continued pressure and have asked for new rallies on February 25.

The European Commission, which has participated in the treaty's drafting process, has defended ACTA throughout, saying that would require changing EU legislation. Critics countered by saying that ACTA's extremely vague language could be used by signatory parties to justify the implementation of harsher laws.

"Let me be very clear: I share people’s concern for these fundamental freedoms. I welcome that people have voiced their concerns so actively – especially over the freedom of the internet. And I also understand that there is uncertainty on what ACTA will really mean for these key issues at the end of the day," De Gucht said.

"Let's cut through this fog of uncertainty and put ACTA in the spotlight of our highest independent judicial authority: the European Court of Justice.This clarity should help support a calm, reasoned, open and democratic discussion on ACTA - whether at the national or at the European level," he said.