The decision of the European Commission who denied a journalist of the New York Times access to Text messages exchanged between the president Ursula von der leyen and the CEO of Pfizer, Albert Bourlain the framework of the negotiations that led to the maxi-agreement on Anti-Covid vaccines “It is canceled.” The EU Court accepting the appeal of the New York Times. The sentence – by some already defined historical – it was very awaited not only for its legal implications, but also for the potential political impact On the leadership of the German to his second term at the helm of the community executive.
Hypothesis of violation of the rules on transparency
The case revolves around the hypothesis that the European Commission has violated the rules on transparency: the request for access to sms – advanced by the US newspaper and his journalist Matina Stevi Pursuant to EU regulations onAccess to the documents of Community institutions – referred to the text messages exchanged between von der leyen And Bourla Between January 2021 And May 2022.
The principle of public access to EU documents
In its first instance sentence, the Court recalls that, in principle, “all documents of European institutions should be accessible to the public », underlining that the answers offered by Brussels – who claimed not to be in possession of those messages – «they are based or on hypothesisor on information changing or inaccurate».
The tests brought by the New York Times
On the contrary, highlight the judges of Luxembourg, Stev and the New York Times they presented «relevant and concordant elements which describe the existence of exchanges “between the President of the Commission and the CEO of Pfizer, thus overcoming” the presumption of non -existence and non -possession of the requested documents “.
Request for credible explanations by the Commission
«In such a situation – explains the EU justice -, the Commission cannot be limited to saying that he is not in possession of the requested documents, but must provide credible explanations that allow the public and the Court to understand why these documents are unavailable».
The absence of clarity in the Brussels investigations
Brusselson the other hand, did not clarify the type of searches carried outneither where they were conducted, nor if the SMS have been deleted And how. Also, he did not explain why those messages – exchanged in the picture of the largest Anti-Covid vaccine contract signed by the EU with pharmaceutical companies – «did not contain substantial information or that would require a monitoring and of which the conservation».
The implications of the sentence: nothing is still decided
There Judgment of the EU Courtwho canceled the refusal of the European Commission to grant to New York Times access to SMS exchanged between the president Ursula von der leyen and the CEO of Pfizer, Albert Bourladuring negotiations on Anti-Covid vaccines“It does not automatically involve that these messages must be made public.”
A new request is possible: but the commission will have to justify itself
Sources of the Court of Justice EUspecifying that “however, according to the logic of the pronunciation, the New York Times may present a new request». In this case, the Commission will still be able to deny accessbut will have to motivate the refusal in a much more way clear, solid And consistenttaking into account the indications provided by the Court, which now constitute a legal reference. The same sources also remember how the Commission’s decision was canceled because “without sufficient justifications». Brussels However, it has the possibility of challenge the sentence first degree by two months.