Background and Key Parties Involved
The European Union’s Court of Justice (CJEU) has annulled the European Commission’s decision to withhold cross text messages exchanged between Ursula von der Leyen, the President of the European Commission, and Albert Bourla, Pfizer’s CEO, during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Ursula von der Leyen is the President of the European Commission, the executive branch of the European Union responsible for proposing legislation and implementing decisions. Albert Bourla is the CEO of Pfizer, a prominent American pharmaceutical company that developed one of the first COVID-19 vaccines in collaboration with BioNTech, a German biotechnology company.
The Case and the Controversy
A journalist from the New York Times based in Brussels initiated the case, requesting that the European Commission disclose the content of text messages exchanged between von der Leyen and Bourla from January 2021 to May 2022. During this period, the Commission negotiated the purchase of massive quantities of COVID-19 vaccines.
The Commission argued that these text messages were not considered official documents and thus were not preserved. However, the CJEU found that the Commission failed to provide a plausible explanation for not possessing the requested documents or why they deemed the text messages unimportant.
The CJEU stated that the Commission’s responses regarding the text messages were based on assumptions or changing and inaccurate information. Moreover, the Commission did not clearly explain whether the text messages had been deliberately deleted or if von der Leyen’s phone had been replaced during this time.
The CJEU emphasized that the Commission cannot merely claim not to possess the requested documents. Instead, it must provide credible explanations that allow the public and the court to understand why the documents cannot be found.
Impact on EU Vaccine Procurement
During the pandemic, the EU primarily purchased or reserved most COVID-19 vaccine doses from the US-German duo Pfizer/BioNTech, despite five other manufacturers having their vaccines approved by the European regulatory body.
Von der Leyen faced multiple accusations, including one in Belgium for “destruction of public documents” and “corruption,” which was later declared inadmissible by the Court of Appeal of Liege. The controversy began in April 2021 when journalist Matina Stevis revealed the existence of the messages in The New York Times and formally requested access to their content, citing a 2001 European regulation.
The European Ombudsman, Emily O’Reilly, publicly urged the Commission in January 2022 to make efforts to recover the messages, stating that they fell under European legislation on public access to documents and should be accessible if related to the institution’s work.
Next Steps and Implications
In response to the CJEU’s decision, the European Commission stated that it “takes note” of the ruling and will now “examine it closely” to determine “the next steps.” The decision can be appealed to the highest European court, the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU), within two months and ten days.
Key Questions and Answers
- What was the main issue in this case? The European Commission refused to disclose text messages between Ursula von der Leyen and Pfizer’s CEO, Albert Bourla, during COVID-19 vaccine negotiations. The European Court of Justice overturned this decision, stating that the Commission failed to provide a plausible explanation for not possessing these documents.
- Who are the key parties involved? Ursula von der Leyen is the President of the European Commission, and Albert Bourla is the CEO of Pfizer. Both were involved in negotiations for COVID-19 vaccine procurement by the European Union.
- What were the implications of this case? The ruling emphasizes transparency and accountability in EU institutions’ decision-making processes, particularly during a public health crisis. It also highlights the role of journalists and European regulations in ensuring access to public documents.
- What happens next? The European Commission will examine the CJEU’s decision and determine the subsequent steps. The decision can be appealed to the Court of Justice of the EU within two months and ten days.
