.png)
6 months ago
23
The latest hearing in the Pfizergate scandal has been postponed until 6 December by a Belgian court to give parties additional time to examine certain aspects of the case, a decision likely to be a relief for European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, who is currently busy on the campaign trail ahead of the June EU elections.
In April 2021, the New York Times broke the ‘Pfizergate’ story, revealing that von der Leyen had negotiated a contract for 1.8 billion COVID-19 vaccine doses during the pandemic with Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla through mobile phone texts that remain undisclosed to this day.
In June 2022, the European Ombudsman concluded that the contract negotiation was a case of ‘maladministration’.
The New York Times referred the ongoing case to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in February 2023.
In April 2023, Frédéric Baldan, a Belgian lobbyist specialising in China-EU trade relations, filed a complaint against von der Leyen with a judge in Liège, accusing her of usurping functions and titles, destroying public documents, unlawful taking of interest, and corruption.
The complaint concerns the negotiation by von der Leyen and the Pfizer CEO by SMS of the third vaccine purchase contract in May 2021.
The Belgian lobbyist believes that the way these discussions took place harmed his country’s public finances and confidence in the EU institutions.
Speaking at a press conference with his lawyer on Saturday (18 May), Baldan added that von der Leyen had not complied with the European Commissioners’ code of conduct and that her immunity should, therefore, have been lifted. However, she is still in office and is running for a second term.
In addition to the issues in the negotiating process, he also denounced the contracts’ lack of clarity and their not being disclosed for commercial secrecy reasons, which contradicted the EU Treaties, which enshrine the right to transparency.
Several associations, political parties, European citizens, and member states, such as Hungary and Poland (under the previous PiS-led government), have joined the complaint.
Last month, Euractiv reported that a hearing was to be held on 17 May. There, the plaintiffs, von der Leyen, Bourla, both Pfizer Inc. and Pfizer Hungary, and BIONTECH were to be heard.
One of the decisions awaited was whether the Belgian investigating judge or the EPPO had competence over the complaint lodged in Liège.
Tug of war between the Belgian judge and the EPPO
Friday’s hearing held at the request of the EPPO, was not attended in person by von der Leyen or Bourla, who were represented by their lawyers. The plaintiffs, the defendants, their lawyers, the Belgian investigating judge, and the EPPO, which had taken up the Belgian complaint last June, were heard before the Chambre du Conseil of the Liège Court of First Instance.
According to a Council regulation, the EPPO is responsible for cases involving damage to the EU budget. But sources close to the case told Euractiv last month that the Belgian investigating judge himself is challenging its jurisdictional competence in this case.
In Baldan’s view, the EPPO is an ‘incomplete structure’ because the regulation that created it is unclear, notably in terms of area of competence, and it was not approved unanimously by all the member states.
Furthermore, he believes the EPPO’s intervention does not respect the principle of subsidiarity, that is, when national law should take precedence over EU law if the former is better adapted and more effective.
On Friday, the court decided to postpone the hearing to give all parties time to reflect further on the issues of competence, von der Leyen’s immunity, and the interest and quality of the plaintiffs’ actions, it was said during the press conference.
In a press release published after the hearing, the EPPO said it had confirmed in October 2022 that it had opened an investigation into the acquisition of the vaccines and that, by Belgian criminal procedure, the complaint lodged in Belgium in 2023 had been forwarded to it.
The EPPO then concluded that the Belgian complaint fell within its competence and that it was up to it ‘to take a position on the legality of the complaints filed with the investigative judge in Liège’ and that the Belgian Chambre du Conseil should, under the Council’s regulations, ‘decide on it’.
To justify its competence, the EPPO says it can deal with cases affecting the EU budget. However, at the end of April this year, von der Leyen stated during the debate between EU lead candidates in Maastricht that the funds for the purchase of the vaccines came from the member states themselves, the plaintiffs underlined on Saturday.
The EPPO also notes that it has pointed out to the European Commission, on several occasions, the ‘lack of compliance with the EPPO Regulation of the Belgian criminal procedure, involving an investigative judge who carries out an entire investigation with full investigative powers.’
‘One of the consequences of this non-compliance is that there are now separate procedures pending before different judicial bodies for complaints originating in the same set of facts,’ the European body concluded.
In December, the Belgian court will have to assess whether the EPPO is competent and whether the investigation by the Belgian investigating judge should be closed or whether the Belgian judge is.
The scandal is a black cloud over von der Leyen who is currently campaigning for a second mandate as Commission president following the EU-wide elections set to take place at the start of June.
[Edited by Rajnish Singh/Alice Taylor]
Read more with Euractiv
English (US)