In one case that could help model the rules of transparency in a digital era, a Wednesday court said that the European Union should not have denying the request of a journalist of text messages exchanged as the best official negotiated for access to the vaccine against the Coronavirus.
The case was focused on the denial of the European Commission request, by a New York Times journalist, for text messages between Ursula von der Leyen, president of the commission and CEO of Pfizer, dr. Albert Bourla. The two exchanged messages in 2021 while they squeezed an agreement for Covid-19 vaccines and the Times challenged the refusal of the Commission to free them in a judicial case in 2023.
The question at the center of the case was whether the text messages of Mrs. Von der Leyen were covered by the laws on EU transparency and should have been potentially released.
The Commission, the executive arm of the European Union, has argued that text messages are “short -lived” by nature and do not contain important information that would require them to be kept. It is not clear whether the messages in question still exist or if they have been deleted.
The General Court of Luxembourg rejected the commission's topic.
“The Commission cannot simply say that it does not hold the requested documents but must provide credible explanations that allow the public and the Court to understand why these documents cannot be found”, established the judges.
The Commission “was unable to explain in a plausible way” because it thought that the messages exchanged on such an important issue – the supply of vaccines for a public health crisis – did not contain important information, said the Court.
The European Commission can appeal to the verdict.
In a declaration, the Commission has declared that “would adopt a new decision that provides a more detailed explanation”.
The New York Times said that the sentence sent a message that “ephemeral” communications such as text messages were not outside the extent of public control.
“Today's decision is a victory for transparency and responsibility in the European Union,” said Nicole Taylor, spokesman for the Times, in a note.
In general, the case raised questions about how much the public should know about negotiations that cost money to taxpayers and shape public policies.
The verdict arrives in an important moment for the reputation of the European Commission for the dissemination. Mrs. Von der Leyen started her second five -year mandate as the leader of the Commission, the executive arm of the blockade, at the end of last year, and made it defended fundamental values such as democracy and the key to transparency for its image.
“It is a case on transparency, but in the end it is a case on responsibility,” said Nick Aiosso, director of the EU of international transparency, an anti -corruption group.
The sentence is the culmination of years of next and back.
The Times reported in April 2021 that Mrs. von der Leyen and Dr. Bourla had exchanged messages and requests for a month while negotiating on access to Covid vaccines.
After reading that article, Alexander Fanta, then a journalist in a German news point, presented a request for freedom of information with the commission asking for text messages. It was not given to them. The EU defender criticized that move, claiming that the commission had committed the bad administration not adequately looking for text messages in response to the request.
But the commission did not withdraw.
The Times and his former head of the Brussels office, Matina Stevis-Gridneff, followed a similar request for messages. When access to the messages was refused, the Times brought the commission to court.
The representatives of the block did not say that someone from the commission other than lady von der Leyen examined the content of the messages. At some point he said he could not find relevant messages.
Paolo Stancanelli, a lawyer who represents the commission, said during a hearing in November: “I am unable to tell you until they existed or if they still exist”.
When both sides exposed their cases in Luxembourg in that hearing, the Times Lawyers claimed that the European Commission actively encouraged the staff to use disappeared text messages.
Pfizer's messages partially attracted attention because they concerned a topic of great public interest: the agreement for Covid vaccines.
The agreement with the pharmaceutical company was one of the major supply contracts in the history of the European Union. It was greeted by many as a success; Through it, the blockade managed to guarantee 1.8 billion doses, enough to increase vaccination rates throughout the European Union.
However, the Commission was persecuted by transparency complaints surrounding the vaccine negotiations.
The Commission has published purchasing agreements but did not disclose the complete terms of the contracts guaranteed for Covid vaccines. He said he had to find a balance between making information public and meeting the legal requirements of vaccine contracts.
Issues related to text messages only served to deepen the concerns about dissemination.
“Transparency and public access to the government's documents play a vital role in democratic supervision,” Kloostra, a Times lawyer, said Bondon, in his discussion of opening at the 2024 hearing.