The nub of the issue is whether text messages should be classed as documents and therefore eligible to be published in the name of transparency. While campaigners and many external observers say they should be treated just like any other means of official communication when related to policymaking, the Commission says not.
Major embarrassment
The case is legally tricky for von der Leyen because she not only personally signed off on the bloc’s largest vaccine contract — worth billions of euros — she also presides over the very institution tasked with enforcing EU law, which includes principles of transparency and accountability. If the court rules against her, it would provide political ammunition to a wide range of critics.
It would also be a major embarrassment given it’s just a few months after she publicly pledged to defend standards of transparency, efficiency and probity in her second term.
“This court ruling could mark a turning point for transparency in the EU,” said Shari Hinds, EU policy officer for political integrity at the NGO Transparency International. “When it comes to key decisions, particularly those affecting public health, secrecy should be avoided.”
The case was instigated by The New York Times and its former Brussels bureau chief, which brought an action against the Commission’s decision not to release the text messages in 2022.
The existence of the messages was revealed in an April 2021 New York Times interview, where Bourla described their exchanges as fostering “deep trust” and facilitating the negotiation of a substantial vaccine deal. This agreement, finalized in May 2021, involved the EU committing to purchase up to 1.8 billion doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 vaccine, the largest by far of all the deals signed by Brussels.
