Pfizergate: Ursula von der Leyen's political Long Covid

The General Court of the European Union will rule on the "Pfizergate" scandal involving Ursula von der Leyen on Wednesday morning. At the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, the President of the European Commission negotiated billion-euro vaccine contracts via text message. The content of the messages remains unknown to the public.

The President of the European Commission is struggling with a condition that can best be described as “political long Covid.”

Four years after she exchanged text messages with the head of pharmaceutical giant Pfizer, the General Court of the European Union will rule on whether this breached transparency rules when von der Leyen refused to make the messages public.

The New York Times filed a lawsuit against the EU Commission in 2023 after it refused to disclose the content of the messages von der Leyen exchanged with Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla—the Times had published the messages in an interview with Bourla in 2021. At the time, the two were negotiating a €35 billion contract to supply 900 million Covid-19 vaccines, with an option for another 900 million.

The EU Commission remained vague about the existence of the messages for a long time. However, in November of last year, a Commission lawyer, Paolo Stancanelli, admitted that an exchange between von der Leyen and Bourla had taken place via private channels.

The court could now order the Commission to disclose the content of the messages.

Lost messages and jet lag

The Commission considers that the text messages would have been archived and retained if they had contained important information directly related to the contract negotiations.

When asked whether the messages still exist or have been deleted, the Commission stated that it was unable to answer this question.

In its defense, it also cites the transient nature of text messages to explain why they are not subject to EU transparency rules.

"The Commission's internal rules stipulate that only messages with substantial content are registered and subsequently archived. In particular, messages of a fleeting nature are not registered," a Commission official clarified.

A Commission official also attributed the communication practice in part to the six-hour time difference between New York, where Bourla is based, and Brussels, which meant they “had to set a timeframe for their discussions via text message.”

It remains to be seen whether these arguments, which the Court heard in November 2024, will convince the judges of the Commission's sincerity.

Judge José Martín y Pérez de Nanclares found that the Commission had not taken "adequate and diligent" measures to justify its refusal to publish the messages. His colleague Paul Nihoul described the matter as "relatively confusing."

Exchange of blows in public

In view of the upcoming ruling, several NGOs and MEPs have already taken a stand.

"This information should have been made public long ago. When decisions affect the health of millions of people, secrecy cannot be a priority," said Shari Hinds, head of political integrity at Transparency International.

“In general – and this is crucial – important public agreements should not be made through private messages, but through formal procedures that ensure democratic accountability,” she added.

Several political groups in the European Parliament – ​​including the Social Democrats, the Greens and some Liberals – also called on the Commission to publish the news when the case became known.

"Transparency is not a luxury, but a democratic obligation. When the European Commission under Ursula von der Leyen refuses to publish text messages or heavily redacts vaccine contracts, it sends a dangerous message: that corporate secrets can be placed above the public interest," said Green MEP Tilly Metz.

Von der Leyen is used to intense criticism from both MEPs and NGOs – but so far, these have had little impact on her position at the helm of the Commission. Even with a ruling against her on Wednesday, she will likely dismiss the allegations again.

A gift for the far right?

The decision could be a stroke of luck for right-wing populist parties in Europe, which regularly use Brussels scandals in their election campaigns at home.

"It is undeniable that the Commission's years of refusal to publish this news has unfortunately given critical voices room to use this issue to their advantage," said Hinds of Transparancy International.

“Regardless of the outcome, the extreme right will of course use this decision for its own interests,” said a source from the Green Party group.

The ruling, against which the Commission can appeal, follows rulings in two other cases concerning access to documents brought by NGOs.

Last December, the Commission quietly changed its internal practices on access to documents, excluding certain categories of documents, such as instant messages, from archiving by default.

(om)