Dear
Sir,
Thank
you very much for your reply
to our request concerning
your opinion on EU civil
servants’ judiciary
immunities. Your answer
was made in the name of
the college of European
Commissionners ; therefore
we understand that as a
whole the European Commission
wishes to preserve judicial
immunity for its bureaucrats.
At least it is a clear-cut
position, already helping
fuel the debate on this
issue.
Since
our aim is to raise European
citizens awareness regarding
democratic challenges within
the European Union, we have
as announced widely circulated
the French and English versions
of your answer.
Meanwhile,
as we receive a growing
number of reactions from
European and national MPs
(and Member States), it
appears that many of them
do share our worries regarding
this E-mmunity. We even
learnt that some EuroMPs
have tried to have it suppressed
without any success yet.
The question about this
judicial immunity does exist
in the minds of many actors
of the European institutional
system.
Let’s
have a look then at your
three arguments in support
of immunity :
1.
Your quotation of Article
23 of Staff Regulation
does not bring any new
element to the discussion
as it essentially mentions
that EU civil servants
are supposed to comply
with the law : it would
have been very surprising
indeed to find Staff regulations
calling for the opposite.
2.
You tell us that the official’s
private life is not covered
by the immunity. Well,
we never said the contrary
; as a matter of fact,
in our original letter,
we even mentioned that
it was different from
the usual diplomatic immunity
upon this very point.
3.
Last but not least, you
tell us that when it comes
to the exercise of the
official’s functions,
relevant national jurisdictions
ask the European Commission
to lift the immunity;
and that the Commission
complies almost systematically.
This is at the very core
of the whole issue. What
does ‘quasi-systematically’
mean ? The Germans have
this very useful saying
: ‘The devil is
hiding in the details’
; therefore we think that
it would be very useful
to give more details about
‘quasi’. A
series of questions come
naturally to mind :
a.
From you answer, it
is obvious that there
have been cases when
the immunity was not
lifted ? Which cases
? And why ?
b.
Who within the Commission
decides to lift or not
the immunity ? As you
answered in the name
of your colleagues,
I suppose that, together
with the Commission’s
Secretary General, you
are part of those who
decide upon this matter,
but who are the other
top bureaucrats involved
? Is the Commission
College deciding upon
such matters? Who prepares
their decision?
c.
On which basis such
decisions are made ?
Is there any standard
criteria ? Or is it
a case by case decision
without any written
guidelines ? How does
the Commission ensure
then that arbitrary
decisions are not taken
?
d.
How does corruption
cases fit into the divide
between private life
and official activities
? In these cases, the
two dimensions are very
intricate.
I hope that the Commission
will be able to bring answers
to these questions which
are just part of a normal,
transparent and democratic
administrative process.
This issue is obviously
becoming part of a European-wide
debate which will develop
in the coming months as
the Constitution ratification
processes will start.
The
Commission is at crossroads.
If it wants to keep judicial
immunities for its civil
servant, it will stay among
all those international
institutions dating from
the 50s ; if it wants to
be part of Europe’s
political construction of
the next decades, it will
have to suppress it and
learn to act as civil servants
do in our democratic countries:
without judicial immunities.
At
this stage, we still do
not understand why an honnest
EU civil servants would
need such a judicial immunity
; and we do not know who
inside the Commission rules
the process of lifting or
not the immunity. And these
are real key-questions because
efficient and democratic
EU institutions are crucial
for the success of tomorrow’s
EU.
Therefore,
Newropeans Magazine and
Newropeans Networks are
determined to keep this
topic high on the European
democratic agenda for the
next 12 months at least.
Hoping
that you will be able to
bring us the necessary answers,
Sincerely
Franck
Biancheri
President
Newropeans Networks |
Lumena
Duluc
Editor in Chief
Newropeans Magazine
|
|