BRUSSELS ― Belgian security forces conducted surveillance on a corporate box at the RSC Anderlecht football stadium, which was being utilized by the Chinese tech firm Huawei to engage with members of the European Parliament (MEPs). This covert operation extended to eavesdropping on conversations involving Huawei’s prominent lobbyist in various settings, including his vehicle. The investigation, acknowledged by three individuals familiar with the matter, is part of a broader probe into corruption allegations that came to light in March. These findings prompted Belgian prosecutors to seek the lifting of immunity for a group of MEPs to facilitate their investigation.
Background of the investigation
The recent developments are part of a concerning narrative regarding China’s influence in European affairs and the potential vulnerability of EU lawmakers to bribery and dubious lobbying tactics, amidst a backdrop of prior scandals. Huawei secured a private box in Anderlecht’s Constant Vanden Stock Stadium for the 2024/25 season at a cost of approximately €50,000, which has hosted notable European teams such as Fenerbahçe, Porto, and Real Sociedad, as confirmed by a spokesperson from RSC Anderlecht.
According to sources informed about the investigation, Belgian authorities are examining whether the acquisition of this box was a strategic move to enhance Huawei lobbyists’ accessibility to MEPs, thereby advancing the company’s interests within EU policymaking.
Details of Huawei’s lobbying strategy
During the inquiry, Belgian prosecutors indicated they were investigating potential bribery cases involving lawmakers who might have received financial incentives for specific political stances, extravagant gifts, or funded travels. The scope of the investigation covers events from 2021 until the end of 2024. Records show that the intent behind Huawei’s hiring of the box was to establish initial contact with politicians and to foster relationships, with one insider stating that lobbyists aimed to “grease” them up.
The lobbyist effectively attracted newly elected MEPs by initially inviting their aides, later extending invitations to a diverse range of lawmakers, former MEPs, and other EU officials.
The surveillance methods employed by Belgian authorities are described as commonplace for investigations of this nature, as noted by a different source close to the probe.
In March, police executed raids at over 20 sites across Belgium and Portugal as part of the investigation into alleged illicit payments made by Huawei to secure an open letter signed by eight European lawmakers advocating for the company’s interests. Thus far, five individuals have been charged, including three Huawei employees and a managing director from Brussels-based Forum Europe, who faced hearings in April and are presumed innocent.
The Anderlecht football club announced it has “no intention to renew” its contract with Huawei beyond the current season, stating, “we have had no official request from Belgian authorities” regarding the surveillance of the box or participation in the investigation.
Two MEPs under scrutiny for their immunity waiver – Maltese Socialist Daniel Attard and Bulgarian liberal Nikola Minchev – acknowledged attending matches at Anderlecht but stated they were unaware of Huawei’s involvement in their invitations. “I was not made aware that the invitation originated from any company, or that it involved a corporate box,” said Attard, who attended a match against Hungary’s Ferencváros in September 2024.
Minchev’s account echoed similar sentiments, explaining his invitation stemmed from a friend and neighbor.
Belgian authorities have also requested the Parliament to lift the immunities of two additional MEPs, Italians Fulvio Martusciello and Salvatore De Meo, while a request for center-right Italian MEP Giusi Princi was withdrawn. It is critical to note that none of the MEPs have been charged with wrongdoing, and a request to lift an MEP’s immunity does not imply any illegal actions. This step is necessary for the police to conduct interviews and undertake comprehensive investigations.
“In spite of the Parliament’s inexcusably permissive ruleset, there is simply no legitimate reason that would explain why MEPs should be receiving gifts from lobbyists,” said Nick Aïossa, director of Transparency International EU, an NGO.
Both the Belgian prosecutor’s office and Huawei have not provided comments regarding these developments.