President European Commission

 

 

Dear President,

I have received a complaint against the European Commission from several civil society organisations.

The complainants are concerned about an opinion of the Scientific Committee on Health, Environmental and Emerging Risks (‘SCHEER’), which advises the Commission. The opinion deals with scientific evidence of adverse health effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (‘RF-EMF’), which are generated by mobile phones or Wi-Fi, among other things. In particular, the complainants argue that:

• The SCHEER working group responsible for preparing the opinion was affected by a structural bias, as members of this group were affiliated to or had received research funding from industry bodies. In addition, the complainants argue that experts representing more critical views on the exposure to RF-EMF should have been included in the working group.
• SCHEER and its working group did not properly consider scientific studies demonstrating adverse effects of RF-EMF. The complainants also point to divergences between the SCHEER opinion and other scientific bodies, such as a study prepared for the European Parliament Research Service (‘EPRS’)[1].

After careful consideration of the complaint, I have decided to open an inquiry into how the Commission dealt with the complainant’s procedural and substantive concerns.

The Ombudsman is not a scientific body and cannot assess the merits of the SCHEER opinion. However, as a body tasked with promoting good administration in the activities of EU institutions, the Ombudsman can examine whether the Commission has procedures put in place to ensure the independence and accountability of its scientific committees, as well as whether it has addressed the complainants’ procedural and substantive concerns in a comprehensive and reasonable manner.[2]

As a first step in my inquiry, I have decided that it is necessary to inspect the following documents:

• initial and annual declarations of interest made by the members of SCHEER that approved the opinion in question and members/experts of the working group responsible for the opinion in question;[3]
• any other declarations of interest or declarations regarding potential or actual conflicts of interest made by the persons mentioned above; and
• the records of any internal assessment, conclusions or decisions taken in relation to the declarations of interest or conflicts of interest mentioned above.

I would be grateful if your staff could provide the requested documents to my Office, preferably in an electronic format, before 27 October 2025. Information or documents that your institution considers to be confidential will not be disclosed to the complainant or any other person without the prior agreement of the Commission.[5]

Following the inspection, it will be necessary for my inquiry team to meet with the relevant representatives of the Commission to discuss the issues raised in this complaint and, in particular, obtain answers to questions set out in the Annex to this letter.

I would be grateful if your staff could contact Mr Michał Krajewski,  who is in charge of this inquiry, to agree the arrangements for the meeting to take place before  28 November 2025.

Yours sincerely,

Teresa Anjinho
European Ombudsman

Strasbourg, 14/10/2025

 

[1] https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2021/690012/EPRS_STU(2021)690012_EN.pdf

[2] Note the Ombudsman’s suggestion for improvement in Case 346/2023/MIK (https://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/en/decision/en/185032): “When responding to (scientific) concerns raised about policy choices, the Commission should seek to address those concerns substantively, rather than restating its position. The Commission should explain publicly how any such concerns have been taken into account.” 

[3] Under point 18 of the Rules of Procedure of the Scientific Committees on Consumer Safety (SCCS) and Health, Environmental and Emerging Risks (SCHEER) of April 2016, https://health.ec.europa.eu/document/download/8dc24a70-8bf9-4f44-b0fa-de1f4b42a69e_en?filename=rules_procedure_2016_en.pdf .

[4] Under point 22 of the Rules of Procedure, ibid., or under any other basis. If any declarations were made verbally, please provide a written record of it.

[5] Please clearly mark such material ‘Confidential’. Encrypted emails can be sent to our dedicated mailbox. Information and documents of this kind will be deleted from the European Ombudsman’s files shortly after the inquiry has ended.