EU transparency - or not.

rock22

 European Union General Court has overturned the Commission presidents refusal to release the text messages from Von Der Leyen to the head of Pfizer.

Up to now, the EU president has refused to hand over these text messages and even claims they have been destroyed. And yet, a day later, the ruling seems to be ignored by the political classes here and in the rest of EUrope. And is even ignored by the media. Perhaps not the most important news story, but I cannot understand how such a ruling against the EU president is not front page news.

Personally I find this behaviour to be consistent with other actions by the president, like ignoring call from both Ireland and Spain ( and others ) to review trade with Israel. But the almost absolute silence on this court ruling is strange.

banie01

Ignored by the media? Really? As I read reports on the case yesterday on RTE, the IT and the Indo. Theres also already been a couple of pieces on the damage that VdL's actions have caused to the EU and it's position Vis a Vis other governance and governments, if this is how it approaches transparency.

What media do you think is ignoring this?

I agree that negotiation via WhatsApp isn't conducive to transparency. That where it occurs it must be archived and added to the record. That the nonsense trotted out by VdL and others regarding "lost" WhatsApp and similar chats must be met with severe enforcement actions against the offenders.

Hopefully, the Pfizer CEO's phone was appropriately archived and the texts can be uncovered via that route.

It being "the" most important news story is a nice touch of hyperbole. Ukraine & Russia are meeting face to face for the 1st time since 2022. Trump is on a corruption tour and dominating the international news cycle and that's leaving aside the fact India and Pakistan are still eyeballing each other across their border. Europe has pledged to support Ukraine with further sanctions on Russia and arms transfers if Russia doesn't engage in meaningful ceasefire and negotiation.

It is a big story, a story that more need to be aware of but far from the biggest at the moment

rock22

@banie01 "It being "the" most important news story is a nice touch of hyperbole. "

Perhaps read what i said. "Perhaps not the most important news story, but I cannot understand how such a ruling against the EU president is not front page news."

This . I think , reflects an attitude which would fit better with an autocracy rather than an institution supposedly based on democracy and a concept of public service.

banie01

1st off the ruling isn't against the President. The president was not enjoined in the action taken by the NYT.

As for what you feel may be an attitude that befits autocracy? Let's see how it plays out in any further enforcement taken against the commission before we jump to conclusions.

beachhead

Announcement not ignored.I did listen to one official(in Von Der Leyen office?) tying herself in knots trying to explain the situation.That was transparency in action.I should have recorded it.Playing it while reading 1984 would be demonstrate how much Eric B missed

Randycove

it is a ridiculous position for the eu to be in.

There is no opposition party as far as the president of the eu commission goes, so they don’t face the same cross examination as a parliament leader would. There is no PM’s question time where they have to defend their actions and get their asses handed to them.

They should face the same level of scrutiny as any other elected official, but they aren’t under the same type of political pressure to do so.

rock22

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123450580#Comment_123450580

The ruling was against the Commission which is headed by von der leyen and all the commissioners are selected from the national nominees by the President. To suggest that because the president was not actually named her hands are clean in this matter is , frankly , ridiculous. It was her actions which gave rise to the court action, it was her commission which was rules to be in error and it was her own personal office which was sanctioned by the Ombudsman . If you have any regard for the EU, and I certainly do, then you would be concerned about what is happening under this presidents 'rule'.

beachhead

Spot on rock22

Peoples opinion of the EU as a run away gravy train enhanced by this affair.

fly_agaric

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123450440#Comment_123450440

I think the pandemic was an emergency situation and she might be forgiven/allowed some actions that might not be appropriate in normal times, given the nature of it.

However don't really think these matters should be kept under a cloak of secrecy forever (now pandemic is over).

On Israel whether we like it or not until recently (a few days ago?) most of the member states did not want to review the Israel-EU agreement and I think von der Leyen/Commission were just a reflecting majority view by not opening any review of it.

It seems like the courts being petitioned and stepping in (if politicians are hiding information that should be available) is antithesis of autocracy. It is a bit ironic that a US newspaper are pursuing the case and utilising the EUs still functional democratic machinery while they mostly cower before their new King at home, who is gradually shredding what remains of US democracy with barely a whimper.