Background

Following the ‘Qatargate’ scandal in December 2022, the European Parliament launched a reform of its ethics and transparency framework. As a first step in this reform process, the European Parliament President announced a ‘14-point proposal’, endorsed by the Conference of Presidents, indicating the measures that needed to be taken to address the deficiencies in the framework revealed by the scandal.

The Ombudsman opened a strategic initiative in January 2023 to obtain more information about the Parliament’s reform plans and to share with the Parliament the experience of her Office on elements that are crucial for the effective administration and enforcement of ethics and transparency rules. She also drew attention to the need for the reform process itself to be transparent. In response, the Parliament President welcomed the Ombudsman’s observations and provided some details on the envisaged measures.

The Parliament has now finalised this first stage of its reform efforts, with the new rules now to be tested in practice. The Parliament has strengthened some of its rules, notably on transparency of Members’ declarations of private interests, conflicts of interest and declarations of meetings with interest representatives. A new ‘transparency webpage’ on the Parliament’s website is also a positive step.

The Ombudsman decided to close the strategic initiative, setting out questions that the Parliament should still address to make sure the new rules are implemented effectively. These concerned, in particular, how the Parliament organises the monitoring and reporting of potential breaches of the rules, notably within the Advisory Committee for the Code of Conduct.

The strategic initiative

On 27 January 2023, the Ombudsman wrote to the Parliament to share her views on the proposed reforms.[1] She stressed the need for transparency of the reform process itself. She also welcomed specific proposals of new or enhanced rules being considered at that time. However, she noted that diligent and independent oversight and enforcement of existing ethics rules was critical. She pointed out that the main mechanism for monitoring the Code of Conduct for MEPs, namely the Parliament’s Advisory Committee, had limited powers.

In its reply of 6 February 2023, the Parliament welcomed the Ombudsman’s observations and outlined the reform process.[2] The President agreed that the process should be transparent, involving as many voices as possible.

On 20 March 2023, following a detailed analysis of the ‘14-point proposal’, the Ombudsman identified additional areas that may benefit from greater clarity or further explanation in order to ensure that the rules as such will be fit for purpose.[3] She sent a set of questions to the Parliament to help it specify how the amended rules would address the shortcomings identified in the existing framework and establish whether the Parliament’s oversight and enforcement system for these rules would be sufficient.

The Parliament replied that the reform process was still ongoing, so that it was not possible to reply to all the questions posed. However, it provided answers where possible and to the extent that it could.

The Ombudsman’s questions and Parliament’s replies

In her letter of 20 March 2023, the Ombudsman indicated the following key elements of the oversight and enforcement system.

1. The Ombudsman asked whether the Advisory Committee would have powers to conduct complaint-based and own-initiative investigations. She also asked about how Parliament could ensure the Committee’s recommendations are implemented as well as questions about its impartiality and independence and the transparency of its work.

The Parliament replied that “a substantially strengthened Advisory Committee should assume a proactive role in signalling certain situations to the President.” Its impartiality was to be guaranteed through a politically balanced composition and by safeguarding measures for the appointment of rapporteurs and the chairperson.

The Advisory Committee, reinforced by three additional members, should now proactively monitor compliance with the Code of Conduct concerning the private interests of MEPs. It is also supposed to receive ‘signals’ of alleged breaches of the Code.[4] However, it remains to be seen how this ‘signalling’ power will operate in practice.  

2. The Ombudsman asked how the new rules introduced as part of the reform process would reinforce the existing ones particularly regarding the administrative arrangements for overseeing compliance and enforcement in case of breaches, including through the use of sanctions. She specifically mentioned the rules concerning the ‘cooling off period’ for former Members, the mandatory declaration of meetings with interest representatives, declarations of conflicts of interest by rapporteurs and shadow rapporteurs, declarations of financial interests by Members, and a ban on friendship groups with third countries.

The Parliament explained that the scope of some new rules would be wider than the existing ones and that sector-specific services will be in charge of monitoring compliance. The details of the organisational measures and the decision as regards the services in charge are matters determined by the Secretary-General[5]. Moreover, the Parliament informed the Ombudsman that the Rules of Procedure would be clearer on the possibility of imposing sanctions in the event of non-compliance with the ethics rules and that the use of the sanctions should be more widespread.

3. The Ombudsman asked which entities within the Parliament would be responsible for coordinating the reform process and how the process itself would be made transparent.

The Parliament said that a “dedicated administrative task force” had been put in place to prepare the adoption of the measures by the Parliament’s competent bodies, that is, the Bureau, the Committee on Constitutional Affairs, and the administrative services of the General Secretariat.

In addition, the Special Committee on Foreign Interference in all Democratic Processes in the European Union, including Disinformation, and the Strengthening of Integrity, Transparency and Accountability in the European Parliament (ING2 Committee) had been given a renewed mandate, which included assessing the possible shortcomings in the Parliament’s relations with third countries.

The Parliament did not directly address the matter of how it would ensure the transparency of the reform process.

The Ombudsman’s assessment

The Ombudsman welcomes the information provided to her by the Parliament within this initiative. It has enabled her to identify progress made since the start of the Parliament’s reform process, especially regarding the changes to the Parliament’s Rules of Procedure and the Code of Conduct, adopted during the Plenary session in September 2023.[6] The Parliament has strengthened its rules, notably as regards the transparency of Members’ declarations of private interests, conflicts of interest and declarations of meetings with interest representatives. For the first time, the Bureau has also introduced a cooling-off period for former Members, albeit for only six months.[7] A new ‘transparency webpage’[8] on the Parliament’s website is also a positive step.

There was, however, insufficient transparency of the reform process itself with most of the discussions taking place in forums that were not public and with limited documentation in the public domain. Although the Parliament has now implemented the ‘14-point proposal’,[9] it was difficult for the public to follow how some crucial decisions were negotiated within the Bureau[10] and within an informal Working Group of the Constitutional Affairs Committee before being put to vote in Committee. This was particularly true for the work of the Bureau, which did not disclose any of the draft documents which led to the adoption of its decisions regarding former Members,[11] rules on access to the Parliament’s premises,[12] and rules governing the participation of interest representatives in events held on Parliament’s premises[13]. The minutes of Bureau meetings, in which the draft decisions were discussed, were published only after the decisions were adopted. This prevented public scrutiny by citizens or civil society prior to the conclusion of the decision making process. This is particularly regrettable given that these decisions sought to better regulate interest representation. Additionally, ‘the 14-point proposal’ - crucial for the reform process as the main agenda setter - is currently not public. Instead, only a press release summarising this document is publically available.[14]

Moreover, there is still room for improvement, notably as regards the following:  

1. As the Ombudsman has stated on many occasions, rule changes are not sufficient to ensure a robust and effective integrity framework. Most important are changes in culture and mind-set, which should be accompanied by adequate implementation and enforcement. It is not currently clear from the answers received and from information in the public domain how the Parliament will monitor and enforce the reinforced rules towards Members, former Members, staff and interest representatives. Proactive monitoring and enforcement is key to ensuring compliance with the reinforced rules. For example, it is not entirely clear who will monitor compliance with the new cooling off periods; how the obligation to publish online meetings with lobbyists will be checked and enforced; who will carry out checks on the new declarations of private interests that should be submitted before 31 December 2023 and how these will differ from the plausibility checks that are already performed; and whether MEPs will be required to provide supporting documents when they submit their Declaration Forms to enable meaningful checks to be conducted.

The Ombudsman encourages the Parliament’s administration to consider these issues as it implements the reforms with a view to building a strong, effective, transparent and predictable integrity framework ahead of the next European Parliament elections.

2. The Ombudsman emphasised the importance of the Advisory Committee for the proper functioning of the Parliament’s Code of Conduct. The recently adopted rules do not yet offer full clarity as to whether and how the new powers and responsibilities of the Committee will address the existing shortcomings in administering and enforcing the Code of Conduct. The annual reports of the Advisory Committee provide little detail on  how Members’ declarations of financial interests are verified, which become all the more important given that these declarations will now encompass an even broader category of ‘private’ interests.  It also remains to be seen how the compatibility of certain side activities of Members with their duty to represent and prioritise the interests of EU citizens will be assessed. 

The Ombudsman notes that the Committee is now expected to take a more proactive role in monitoring compliance with the Code of Conduct, and that it will be authorised to receive ‘signals’ on alleged breaches of the Code. However, it is still unclear what form these signals should take, how they should be communicated to the Committee and how they will be assessed. More transparency on these and other procedures would be welcome and should not wait until the publication of the Committee’s annual report. The effective operation of the Committee is all the more important now that, under the new rules, definitions of private interests and rules on solving potential conflicts have been strengthened but, at the same time, Members may still engage in side activities. Moreover, the proposed establishment of an Inter-institutional Ethics Body by the EU institutions makes the role of Parliament’s Advisory Committee all the more important in enforcing the Parliament’s own ethical framework in line with common ethical standards.[15]

To support the committee as effectively as possible, the Parliament should reflect on the procedure for checking the declarations of private interests submitted by the Members, and whether this procedure should encompass requesting and checking background documentation. The Parliament should also reflect on the Advisory Committee’s powers and the implementation of its recommendations, as well as formalising the procedure in which the Committee will receive ‘signals’ of potential breaches including protection  against reprisals for those providing signals. The Ombudsman notes that the Parliament has provided the Bureau with the necessary power to further reinforce the Committee’s procedural framework. Under the new rules, ‘the Bureau may adopt rules on the procedure for the signalling of alleged breaches.’[16] The Ombudsman still trusts that, in exercising this power, the Bureau will ensure adequate transparency of its decision-making.

3. The Parliament should also reflect on the transparency of the reform process itself, in particular regarding decisions adopted by the Bureau. More generally, the Parliament could make available the minutes of the meetings (or draft versions) in which draft decisions of significant public interest, such as those relating to the setting of ethical and transparency standards expected of its members, prior to the adoption of such decisions. Moreover, the Parliament should, in this context, disclose the preparatory documents based on which such decisions are adopted, including the Secretary General’s notes and draft decisions. This greater level of transparency would allow the public to scrutinise and comment on internal decision-making processes that are of significant public interest.

Conclusion

The Ombudsman welcomes the information provided to her by the Parliament within this initiative. That said, the Ombudsman regrets the inadequate transparency of the process. Moreover, there is still room for improvement as regards the resources and arrangements needed to properly monitor and enforce the amended rules, particularly regarding the Advisory Committee and the transparency of the decision making process of the Bureau. The Ombudsman now closes this initiative hoping this assessment will be of use to further develop and implement the Parliament’s rules on integrity and transparency.

Emily O'Reilly
European Ombudsman

Strasbourg, 07/12/2023

 

[1] https://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/en/doc/correspondence/en/165342

[2] https://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/en/doc/correspondence/en/165840

[3] For full list of questions please see the Ombudsman’s letter to the Parliament President, sent on 30 March 2023

[4] See Article 10 of Annex I to the Parliament Rules of Procedure on the Code of Conduct for Members of the European Parliament Regarding Integrity and Transparency, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/rules/rules20231101/Rules20231101_EN.pdf.

[5] Moreover, the Bureau adopted implementing measures for the Code of Conduct: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/pdf/meps/Implementing%20measures_EN.pdf

[6] Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament in force from 1 November 2023, see also the amendments, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2023-0316_EN.html

[7] Decision of the Parliament’s Bureau 17 April 2023

[8] https://www.europarl.europa.eu/at-your-service/en/transparency

[9] https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/files/ep-implementation-progress-of-14-points-reform-25-Sept.pdf

[10] The Bureau is the body that lays down rules for Parliament. It draws up Parliament’s preliminary draft budget and decides all administrative, staff and organisational matters. The Bureau consists of the President of the European Parliament, the 14 Vice-Presidents and the five Quaestors elected by Parliament for a period of two and a half years (which can be renewed).

[11] https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/publications/reg/2023/422.534BUR/EP-PE_REG(2023)422.534BUR(2023-04-17)_EN.pdf

[12] https://epintranet.in.ep.europa.eu/SibData/01_Bureau/18_Communications/2023/05.23/bureau%20notice%2005-2023%20-%20rules%20on%20access%20to%20the%20ep_en.pdf

[13] https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/publications/reg/2023/750.730BUR/EP-PE_REG(2023)750.730BUR_EN.pdf

[14] https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20230208IPR72802/group-leaders-endorse-first-steps-of-parliamentary-reform For an overview of how the specific points of the proposals have been implemented see https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/files/ep-implementation-progress-of-14-points-reform-18-July.pdf

[15] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_23_3106

[16] Article 10(5), last sentence, of the Code of Conduct, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/rules/rules20231101/Rules20231101_EN.pdf