Court Sides With New York Times Over Access to E.U. Covid Vaccine Messages
A significant court ruling in Luxembourg determined that the European Union should have honored a journalist's request for access to text messages exchanged between Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, and Pfizer’s CEO during Covid-19 vaccine negotiations. This case shed light on whether such communications fall under E.U. transparency laws, as the European Commission's stance that the messages were too 'short-lived' to retain was rejected by the court. The verdict emphasized the importance of transparency and accountability in public affairs, especially on matters involving substantial taxpayer money and public policy. The ruling also highlighted ongoing transparency challenges faced by the European Commission, which had previously been criticized for not adequately searching for or retaining these messages. This decision is seen as a landmark for public access to government communications, reinforcing democratic oversight in the digital age.
Context:
A significant court ruling in Luxembourg determined that the European Union should have honored a journalist's request for access to text messages exchanged between Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, and Pfizer’s CEO during Covid-19 vaccine negotiations. This case shed light on whether such communications fall under E.U. transparency laws, as the European Commission's stance that the messages were too 'short-lived' to retain was rejected by the court. The verdict emphasized the importance of transparency and accountability in public affairs, especially on matters involving substantial taxpayer money and public policy. The ruling also highlighted ongoing transparency challenges faced by the European Commission, which had previously been criticized for not adequately searching for or retaining these messages. This decision is seen as a landmark for public access to government communications, reinforcing democratic oversight in the digital age.
Dive Deeper:
The court case revolved around a journalist's request for text messages exchanged between Ursula von der Leyen and Pfizer’s CEO, which were part of negotiations for Covid-19 vaccine contracts in 2021. The European Commission initially denied this request, arguing that such messages were too ephemeral to be retained under transparency laws.
The General Court in Luxembourg rejected the commission's argument, stating that the commission must provide credible explanations for the absence of the messages and that it failed to plausibly justify why texts on significant public health negotiations lacked important information.
The New York Times, which pursued the case, viewed the ruling as a victory for transparency and asserted that digital communications should be subject to public scrutiny, especially when they involve considerable public interest and expenditure.
The ruling comes during a crucial period for the European Commission's reputation for transparency, as Ursula von der Leyen, who has emphasized democracy and transparency during her tenure, recently began her second term as head of the bloc's executive arm.
The case raised broader questions about public access to governmental negotiations, particularly those involving large amounts of taxpayer money, as the vaccine contract with Pfizer was one of the largest procurement deals in E.U. history.
The European Commission has faced ongoing criticism and legal challenges over its transparency practices, including from the E.U. ombudsman, which accused it of maladministration for not adequately searching for the requested text messages.
Despite the court's decision, the commission has not disclosed the full terms of the vaccine contracts, citing the need to balance public information with legal obligations, and has indicated plans to provide a more detailed explanation in response to the ruling.