European court sides with NYT over requests for von der Leyen’s texts with Pfizer CEO
The European Court of Justice found that the European Commission failed to explain why text messages with pharmaceutical giant Pfizer CEO should be kept private.
Berlaymont has been closely watching the highly anticipated legal ruling on transparency around the European Union’s vaccine deal with pharmaceutical giant Pfizer.
Pfizergate is the name of the political scandal in Brussels involving European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen and Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla over the procurement of Covid-19 vaccines.
In 2021, during the pandemic, the EU signed one of the biggest single deals for Covid-19 vaccines with Pfizer. The EU bought nearly two billion doses of Pfizer-Biontech’s vaccine, adding to the 600 million shots it had already contracted from the firms.
This deal developed into a political scandal at the Commission’s headquarters, as journalists at the New York Times reported on von der Leyen using her phone to strike a deal with Pfizer’s boss.
However, using her phone, the president allegedly bypassed the procurement process.
Several media outlets, including the NYT, requested access to these messages from von der Leyen’s office. The journalists sought her messages with Bourla between 1 January 2021 and 11 May 2022.
The Commission rejected that application on the ground that it did not hold the documents covered by it. A complaint was issued to the European Ombudsman, Emily O’Reilly, who opened a probe and was refused access to the messages.
The New York Times took legal action against the Commission via its journalist Matina Stevi.
The case was lodged in 2023 in the bloc’s highest court after the US paper’s freedom of information request over the messages was rejected.
A hearing went ahead last November, and the court needs to consider whether these messages should be regarded as documents that can be requested and disclosed to the public.
The paper requested that the General Court of the European Union annul the Commission’s decision, and today, the court sided with the paper and annulled the Commission’s decision.
The court explained that the Commission cannot merely state that it does not hold the requested documents but must provide credible explanations enabling the public and the court to understand why those documents cannot be found.
The court found that the Commission did not explain in detail the type of searches it carried out to find those documents or the identity of the places where those searches took place.
The legal ruling also noted that the Commission did not clarify whether the requested text messages were deleted and, if so, whether the deletion was deliberate or automatic or whether the president’s mobile phone had been replaced in the meantime.
The ruling by the EU judges will damage von der Leyen’s reputation and raise questions about the Commission’s transparency. If it seeks to appeal, it must submit its decision within two months.