Date: Tuesday, 09 July 2024

Remote meeting

Present

European Commission

DG HOME. A - International & Horizontal Affairs

One representative from the Policy Coordination & Interinstitutional relations Unit

Three representatives from the Communication Unit

Two representatives from the Legal Affairs and Anti-Corruption Unit

Secretariat General

Three representatives from the Transparency, Document Management and Access to Documents Unit

One representative from the Ethics, Good Administration & Relations with the European Ombudsman Unit

European Ombudsman:

Silvia FULLER - Inquiries Officer

Paulien VAN DE VELDE-VAN RUMST - Inquiries Officer

Krzesimir WAWRZYCZEK-SEIFERT - Inquiries Trainee

Purpose of the meeting

The purpose of the meeting was for the Ombudsman inquiry team to obtain some clarifications on the redactions in two of the documents at issue in the complainant’s public access request, namely document 3 and document 5.

Introduction and procedural information

The Ombudsman inquiry team introduced themselves, thanked the Commission representatives for meeting with them and set out the purpose of the meeting. They outlined the legal framework that applies to meetings held by the Ombudsman, in particular, that the Ombudsman would not disclose any information identified by the Commission as confidential, neither to the complainant nor to any other person outside the Ombudsman’s Office, without the Commission’s prior consent.^[1]

The inquiry team explained that they would draw up a draft report on the meeting to be sent to the Commission to ensure that the contents were factually accurate and complete. The meeting report would then be finalised, included in the file and provided to the complainant. No confidential information would be included in the report or otherwise provided to the complainant or any third party.

Information exchanged

Document 3 - email of 25 October 2022 from DG HOME to DG COMM

The Ombudsman inquiry team asked the Commission representatives to clarify how the redacted text in the email would fall under the exception of personal data that the Commission had invoked in its decision.

The Commission representatives replied that the public security exception should have been invoked. The Commission representatives then provided additional confidential information explaining how the redacted information was protected by the exception set out in Article 4(1)(a) first indent of Regulation 1049/2001.

Document 5 - Specific contract

The Ombudsman inquiry team asked how disclosure of the contractor would undermine its commercial interests, in particular given that the name has been published on the Commission website for the Flash Eurobarometer.

The Commission representatives explained that the contractor’s reputation was also protected by the exception set out in Article 4(2) first indent. The Commission representatives then provided additional confidential information explaining how the contractor’s reputation would have been undermined by disclosure.

Possible wider access

The Ombudsman inquiry team asked whether, given the passage of time, wider access might now be possible to the redacted documents. The Commission representatives replied that the Commission will consider whether further partial access could be granted to the two documents.

Conclusion of the meeting

The Commission will inform the complainant of its new assessment as regards the two documents concerned.

The inquiry team thanked the Commission representatives for their time and for the explanations provided, and the meeting ended.

 

Brussels, 09 July 2024

Silvia FULLER                                                                                            Paulien VAN DE VELDE-VAN RUMST

Inquiries Officer                                                                                           Inquiries Officer

 

 

[1] Article 4.8 of the European Ombudsman’s Implementing Provisions.