Von der Leyen Loses Court Case in Blow to Her Second Term Bid
7/17/2024 3:27:59 PM
Ursula von der Leyen's bid for a second term as European Commission chief has been dealt a major blow after a top EU court ruled she was not transparent enough with the public about Covid-19 vaccine contracts.
The EU General Court ruled against the Commission's decision to redact large parts of the contracts before making them available.
The ruling came just over 24 hours before von der Leyen's political future will be decided by MEPs. She needs 361 of the 720 EU lawmakers to back her in a secret vote that is expected to be close.
One of the groups that von der Leyen has been seeking support from is the Greens, members of which brought this vaccine court case.
They filed requests to access the vaccine contracts and certain related documents to understand the agreement between the Commission and Covid-19 vaccine manufacturers in 2021.
The Commission only agreed to give partial access to certain contracts, arguing that some sections had been redacted to protect commercial interests or for privacy matters. The Green MEPs then took the Commission to court over the refusal.
The General Court on Wednesday partially upheld the MEPs’ lawsuit and annulled the Commission’s decision to redact parts of the contracts.
It pushed against the Commission’s decision to conceal provisions on indemnification, arguing that the Commission failed to prove how those clauses would undermine the commercial interests of the pharmaceutical companies.
The Commission had also refused to disclose personal details of the officials who negotiated the purchase of the vaccines over privacy concerns. But the Court found that the MEPs demonstrated the “public interest” in identifying that team, in order to ascertain if they had any conflicts of interest.
Tilly Metz, one of the Green MEPs who filed the lawsuit, said the ruling is “significant for the future,” as the Commission is expected to perform more joint procurements — in health, but potentially also in defense.
“It is important that the court has confirmed the importance of proper justifications for protecting commercial interests,” she said in a statement.
“The new European Commission must now adapt their handling of access to documents requests to be in line with today’s ruling,” she added.
The Commission pointed out that the court agreed that certain clauses of the contracts were covered by protection of commercial interest, only partially upholding the lawsuit.
“In these cases, the Commission needed to strike a difficult balance between the right of the public, including MEPs, to information, and the legal requirements emanating from the COVID-19 contracts themselves, which could result in claims for damages at the cost of taxpayers' money,” the Commission said in a statement.
The executive said it will “carefully study the Court's judgments and their implications” and that it “reserves its legal options.”
The Commission can appeal the ruling within two months and ten days of the decision.
Other cases regarding the Pfizer contracts and communication between von der Leyen and Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla are also pending in different EU jurisdictions.
The EU General Court ruled against the Commission's decision to redact large parts of the contracts before making them available.
The ruling came just over 24 hours before von der Leyen's political future will be decided by MEPs. She needs 361 of the 720 EU lawmakers to back her in a secret vote that is expected to be close.
One of the groups that von der Leyen has been seeking support from is the Greens, members of which brought this vaccine court case.
They filed requests to access the vaccine contracts and certain related documents to understand the agreement between the Commission and Covid-19 vaccine manufacturers in 2021.
The Commission only agreed to give partial access to certain contracts, arguing that some sections had been redacted to protect commercial interests or for privacy matters. The Green MEPs then took the Commission to court over the refusal.
The General Court on Wednesday partially upheld the MEPs’ lawsuit and annulled the Commission’s decision to redact parts of the contracts.
It pushed against the Commission’s decision to conceal provisions on indemnification, arguing that the Commission failed to prove how those clauses would undermine the commercial interests of the pharmaceutical companies.
The Commission had also refused to disclose personal details of the officials who negotiated the purchase of the vaccines over privacy concerns. But the Court found that the MEPs demonstrated the “public interest” in identifying that team, in order to ascertain if they had any conflicts of interest.
Tilly Metz, one of the Green MEPs who filed the lawsuit, said the ruling is “significant for the future,” as the Commission is expected to perform more joint procurements — in health, but potentially also in defense.
“It is important that the court has confirmed the importance of proper justifications for protecting commercial interests,” she said in a statement.
“The new European Commission must now adapt their handling of access to documents requests to be in line with today’s ruling,” she added.
The Commission pointed out that the court agreed that certain clauses of the contracts were covered by protection of commercial interest, only partially upholding the lawsuit.
“In these cases, the Commission needed to strike a difficult balance between the right of the public, including MEPs, to information, and the legal requirements emanating from the COVID-19 contracts themselves, which could result in claims for damages at the cost of taxpayers' money,” the Commission said in a statement.
The executive said it will “carefully study the Court's judgments and their implications” and that it “reserves its legal options.”
The Commission can appeal the ruling within two months and ten days of the decision.
Other cases regarding the Pfizer contracts and communication between von der Leyen and Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla are also pending in different EU jurisdictions.