Brussels (The Brussels Morning Newspaper) – The European Court of Justice (ECJ) has revoked a European Commission conclusion to conceal specific parts of COVID-19 vaccine contracts amid Von der Leyen’s struggles to gain support for re-election.
What sparked Green MEPs’ request for contracts?
In October 2021, Green MEPs requested access to the COVID-19 vaccine contracts arranged by the Commission to know the agreements’ terms and conditions. According to the group, the determination to take the case to the High Court came after months of parallel with the European Commission asking for transparent access to the agreements, to which the executive only delivered heavily redacted versions.
Why did ECJ revoke the vaccine contract ruling?
The ECJ has ruled that the EU Commission did not give adequate access to the purchase agreements and believes that the executive’s decision to issue only redacted versions of the contracts includes irregularities. The ruling arrives just one day before the European Parliament votes on Von der Leyen’s reappointment as EU Commission President. Honoured at first for negotiating the COVID-19 vaccine agreements and making them available in Europe, the spotlight was quickly surpassed by the lack of transparency.
According to the Court, the EU Commission “did not indicate that wider access to those clauses would damage the commercial interests of those undertakings”.
How does the ruling impact Von der Leyen’s re-election?
According to analysts, So far, the subject hasn’t affected von der Leyen’s candidacy as she quickly evolved the consensus nomination among the major political forces in the last mandate – EPP, S&D and Renew Europe. This ruling, however, creates a dilemma for the Greens – who questioned the EU Commission’s redactions before the European Court of Justice. The Greens have been wooed by von der Leyen in recent days as she aims to shore up support for her nomination ahead of tomorrow’s vote.
What was MEP Metz’s reaction to the ECJ ruling?
“It is important that the court has confirmed the importance of proper justifications for protecting commercial interests. This ruling is significant for the future, as the EU Commission is expected to undertake more joint procurements in areas like health and potentially defence,” stated MEP Tilly Metz, one of the deputies who presented the original request, in a press release after the ruling, stating: “The new European Commission must now adjust their handling of access to documents requests to be in line with today’s ruling.”
How will the EU Commission handle document requests now?
“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 EU executive stated in a press release following the ruling.
The statement expressed the EU Commission considers it has delivered the European Parliament adequate information on the COVID-19 vaccine agreements, following a Framework Agreement between the two institutions. The EU Commission “reserves its legal options” and will study the importance of the ruling. It now has two months to plead the case.
