In brief
On November 15, 2024, The New York Times began legal proceedings in Luxembourg against the European Commission, demanding the release of text messages that were exchanged during the negotiations for a significant Covid-19 vaccine agreement. This case raises vital questions about transparency and the definition of official documents within the European Union's legal framework.
The proceedings initiated by The New York Times center around the necessity of public access to government communications, particularly with high-stakes issues like the Covid-19 vaccine negotiations. The newspaper's lawyer, Bondine Kloostra, emphasized the essential role of transparency in promoting and maintaining democratic accountability: “This case presents a very important issue: whether officials may evade public transparency by communicating via text messages rather than more traditional means.” The New York Times filed the lawsuit following its freedom of information request directed at Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, demanding access to messages exchanged with Pfizer's CEO, Albert Bourla.In response, the European Commission asserted that these text messages are considered "ephemeral" documents and thus do not require documentation or registration. Despite their inability to locate the requested texts, the Commission has not clarified whether a thorough search of von der Leyen’s communications was conducted. Paolo Stancanelli, representing the European Commission, argued that the absence of registration implies that no significant text-based negotiations took place between von der Leyen and Bourla regarding the vaccine contract.As the legal battle unfolds, the outcome could set a critical precedent in distinguishing the classification of communications as public documents within European governance, further impacting the transparency of actions taken by public officials.
