Search inquiries

The case concerned how the European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) assessed the education and professional experience of a candidate in a selection procedure for recruiting EU staff in the field of agriculture.

The Ombudsman found nothing to suggest a manifest error in how the selection board assessed the complainant’s qualifications and, therefore, closed the inquiry with a finding of no maladministration.

The case concerned the European Commission’s refusal to grant full public access to documents concerning meetings of the Comprehensive and Economic Trade Agreement (CETA) committees. CETA committees bring together representatives of the EU and Canada to negotiate the implementation of their free trade agreement. In withholding access to parts of the requested documents, the Commission invoked exceptions under the EU’s law on public access to documents, arguing that full disclosure would undermine the public interest as regards international relations and the protection of personal data.

The Ombudsman inquiry team inspected non-redacted versions of the requested documents and met with Commission representatives to obtain additional explanations. In view of the wide margin of discretion of the EU institutions in considering whether disclosure could undermine international relations, the Ombudsman considered that the Commission’s decision to refuse access was not manifestly wrong. As there was no other public interest to take into consideration as regards disclosure, the Ombudsman found that the Commission was justified in its decision. The Ombudsman therefore closed the case finding no maladministration.

However, the Ombudsman notes that the complainant raises valid issues and believes that public debate on international agreements is of vital importance. Such debate cannot take place without a strong commitment to transparency on all sides.