Multi-level governance (‛MLG’) systems generate accountability problems. The difficulties are visible in policy-making processes as well as in regulatory and law implementation efforts. Accountability matters have been identified in European governance and non-European governance.1 European administrative law has dealt with the judicial angle to the MLG accountability quandary. Specifically, the focus has been put on the deficient legal protection of a citizen when he is a party to a European administrative cooperative procedure, i.e. a procedure in which administrations from different Member States participate, or a procedure in which administrations of one or various Member States plus the EU participate. Scholars have raised this concern and put forward various solutions. However, one alternative has not been explored yet. This alternative is the idea of aligning adjudicative jurisdictions (that of Member States and the CJEU) so as to form a cooperative mode for the revision of cooperative procedures: a European jurisdiction integrated by the coordinated action of European juris- dictions. The idea may sound sensible to the ears of political scientists but less so to legal scholars because current EU constitutional constraints block the implementation of such a proposal. But, is there really no legal argument to ground a European-level cooperative exercise of jurisdiction over cooperative procedures? If there were, not only could it inspire European MLG, but it might also shed some light on MLG systems outside Europe. The article addresses the challenge of how such argumentation should be shaped.