Background to the strategic initiative

1. In 2022, the Belgian federal prosecutor’s office opened an investigation into allegations of money-laundering, corruption and participation in a criminal organisation. The background to this investigation are the allegations that both Morocco and Qatar allegedly attempted to influence Members, former Members and staff of the European Parliament through acts of corruption, which constitutes serious foreign interference in the EU’s democratic processes.

2. On 27 February 2023, a media outlet reported that the Director-General of the Commission’s Transport Department (DG MOVE) travelled a number of times between 2015 and 2021 at the expense of the Qatari government or organisations that are affiliated to it or its interests. During that period, DG MOVE was closely involved in negotiating the EU-Qatar air transport agreement^[1], signed on 18 October 2021. The Qatari government and organisations close to it paying for hospitality for DG MOVE’s most senior official gave rise to the legitimate question whether they sought to unduly influence EU decision making in this area.

3. Directors-General are obliged to make public the details of their interactions with organisations or self-employed individuals on issues relating to policy-making and implementation in the Union within a period of two weeks following the meeting.^[2] A number of the trips in question did not appear to have been made public by the Director-General in question.

4. On 3 March 2023, the Ombudsman wrote the Commission with questions related to these issues.

The strategic initiative

5. The Ombudsman requested the Commission to provide details on:

1) the mechanism in place to check and ensure that Directors-General of the Commission make public information on all meetings held by them with organisations or self-employed individuals on issues relating to policy-making and implementation in the Union?

2) the process through which the Director-General’s business trips where third parties covered expenses were authorised within the Commission?

3) what changes are proposed as regards the authorisation of missions subsidised by third parties.

4) the number of cases in which travel and other costs related to missions undertaken by Commissioners and senior officials have been paid for by third parties in the years 2021, 2022 and 2023 to date?

6. On 16 October 2023, the Commission replied to the Ombudsman’s request.[3] The Commission incurred a lengthy delay in replying: it asked for two one-month extensions and ultimately replied two and a half months beyond the extended deadline. The Commission submitted the data in reply to question four (and in the reply’s annex 1) on a confidential basis, because of the detailed nature of the information provided and due to data protection concerns.

The Ombudsman’s assessment

Business trips where third parties covered expenses

7. Shortly after the Ombudsman wrote to the Commission and after the matter was reported in a European media outlet^[4], the Commission changed the rules in relation to third parties covering expenses for business trips of its staff. The updated rules mean that:

• Third parties can cover expenses of Commission staff members only when they are EU Member State authorities, EEA and EFTA country authorities, international organisations (UN) and for G7/G20 summits, and universities when the business trip is for academic purposes. Third country authorities or corporate interests can no longer cover mission expenses of Commission staff members.
• Where such a third party pays mission expenses, the Commission now applies the four eyes principle to assessing possible conflicts of interest. In the case of approval of mission expenses paid by third parties (in whole or in part) for Directors-General and Heads of Service, these officials must in every case demonstrably consult the Head of Cabinet of the Commissioner of their policy area.

8. This means that controversial contributions, such as those related to the relevant missions of the former Director-General of DG MOVE, can no longer be approved.

9. Within the period in scope of the initiative, some business trips taken by Commissioners included expenses covered by third parties. The Ombudsman however notes that none of these involved corporate interests or non-EU countries.

10. The Commission pointed out that the total number of missions in scope (between 2021 and 3 March 2023) where third parties covered mission expenses of Commissioners or Commission senior officials is relatively small. The year 2022 saw the largest contribution to work travel with third party contributions. This is likely because of COVID-19 restrictions affected travel in 2021.

11. The Ombudsman notes that, as the case of the former Director-General of DG MOVE made clear, even a few problematic business trips with third party funding of senior Commission officials can cast doubt on the independence of the officials concerned and may warrant mitigating measures. To complete her review, the Ombudsman will therefore now ask the Commission, in the context of an own-initiative inquiry, for an inspection of the files in which third country authorities or corporate interests covered the expenses.

12. The Commission shared the statistical information on the business trips that occurred with third party contributions on a confidential basis. The Ombudsman urges the Commission to make public at the very least a summary of the statistical information for the benefit of other interested parties.

Lobbying transparency for Directors-General

13. On the issue of transparency of meetings of Directors-General with interest representatives, while the Commission indicated the total number of such meetings made public in 2022[5], it did not directly address the point that meetings seem to have been missing from previous records.

14. The Commission limited itself to saying that it is the responsibility of the Directors-General and their support staff to ensure compliance with the obligation to disclose timely information on meetings with interest representatives. The Commission raises awareness of the obligation, and aims to facilitate easy registration of the meetings.

15. A system based solely on self-declarations in the area of lobbying transparency risks being inadequate, as the conflict of interest self-assessment proved to be in the area of business trip expenses. The Ombudsman therefore suggests that the Commission reflects on whether more could be done to ensure compliance with the obligation to disclose timely information on meetings with interest representatives, for example based on available data in visitors’ logs or mission orders.

Conclusion

The Ombudsman closes this initiative with the following conclusion:

The Ombudsman will now ask the Commission, in the context of an own-initiative inquiry, for an inspection of the files in which third country authorities or corporate interests covered the expenses.

The Commission will be informed of this closing note.

Emily O'Reilly
European Ombudsman

Strasbourg, 08/12/2023

 

[1] See: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_21_5344.

[2] Commission Decision of 25 November 2014 on the publication of information on meetings held between Directors-General of the Commission and organisations or self-employed individuals, 2014/838/EU, Euratom: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec/2014/838/oj.

[3] See: https://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/doc/correspondence/176934.

[4] See: https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-transport-chief-henrik-hololei-flew-free-qatar-airways-negotiate-aviation-deal-doha-qatargate-corruption/.

[5] 686 meetings between Directors-General and interest representatives were disclosed in 2022.