I think we have done this one to death for the Nth time
For a laugh, we could have a poll on how many think EASA got legal advice on the anti N-reg proposals.
To me, it looks like they didn't. It would not be suprising, given that EASA sneaked this in quickly, partly by conning the Transport Committee with a false promise of a BASA with the USA. So the stuff made the books without anybody looking at it closely.
That would be virtually impossible to do in the UK system.
OTOH one aviation barrister advises me that a lot of European law is like that - poorly drafted. That is the "cockup v. conspiracy" position i.e. a cockup.
Then, I don't understand the point of an EU Directive which is vague and useless, and which every national court will interpret potentially differently, and perhaps most countries will never enforce it. Assuming there was an intelligent intention behind this bit of EASA FCL, it could only be to create FUD, to continue to keep a lid on the N-reg scene without anybody actually doing anything much...
Some insider stuff from EASA suggests this was a private project of several high placed individuals, and the "FUD theory" would then make sense.