BRUSSELS — A significant legal challenge is underway as one of the European Union’s leading courts is being petitioned to determine whether the European Parliament has overstepped its legal boundaries by rejecting a request from lawmakers to investigate the handling of vaccine contracts within the bloc.
A legal document obtained reveals that the General Court has received a motion filed by Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) from both right-wing and far-right factions, who argue that the decision made by political group leaders on September 3 to block a vote on forming an investigative committee was unlawful.
Legal action from right-wing factions
This legal action is spearheaded by MEPs affiliated with the far-right Europe of Sovereign Nations and Patriots groups, as well as members of the right-wing European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) group. In April, these lawmakers called for a thorough inquiry into “allegations of corruption, money-laundering, abuse of power, undue interference in legislative processes.”
“More than 180 Members demanded an inquiry into how the EU handled billions in vaccine contracts and related dealings,”
stated Christine Anderson, the ESN chief whip and a politician from the Alternative for Germany party, who is listed as a party to the lawsuit. “The Parliament’s leadership has no right to silence that request.”
The application was officially filed on October 31, and the Parliament is required to respond to the request for an expedited ruling by November 20. Should the standard procedures be followed, it is possible that this matter could remain unresolved for several years.
The press service of the Parliament has stated that it refrains from commenting on ongoing judicial proceedings.
Allegations of procedural violations
During a session on Monday, MEP Marieke Ehlers from the Patriots group accused the Conference of Presidents—a gathering of political group leaders—of obstructing the initiation of the inquiry by preventing a vote that could be conducted by the entire Parliament. “It’s not up to the group leaders to block an initiative that has its origin in giving individual members a particular right,” she asserted.
Members of Parliament possess the authority to establish Committees of Inquiry regarding Transparency and Accountability, provided they can garner sufficient support through signatures. The three MEPs involved in the lawsuit contend that the parliamentary leaders breached procedural norms by rejecting the proposal in a non-transparent manner and failing to present it for a plenary vote.
Currently, any inquiry request is first submitted to the conference of presidents before being brought to a plenary vote, a practice that right-wing lawmakers are now contesting.
“The next step is now we are positioning the court to annul the decision and to prompt the President of the Parliament to put it up to a vote in the [plenary],”
Anderson explained to POLITICO.
Inquiry committees are designed to investigate accusations of misconduct within EU institutions, notably including the influential European Commission, which has recently faced intense criticism for its refusal to disclose communications with Pfizer, the vaccine manufacturer.
ECR lawmaker Charlie Weimers emphasized that “this is not a political issue for the court to consider, but rather a procedural, legal one where rules quite obviously were not followed … we are rather optimistic that this will go our way.”
Daniel Freund, a Green MEP known for his criticism of far-right actions, acknowledged that the lawmakers “might have a point that, legally speaking, it should have probably been decided in plenary.” He added, however, that he is not in favor of allowing the Patriots to overwhelm the Parliament with inquiries, pointing out that committees of inquiry are essential tools for the opposition to hold the government accountable while also expressing concern that requiring majority support for such committees undermines their intended purpose.