What changed

Follow-up to the European Parliament non-legislative resolution on the annual report on the activities of the European Ombudsman in 2022

P9_TA(2024)0035

Rapporteur: Petr JAHR (EPP / DE)

Activities of the European Ombudsman – annual report 2022

Reference number: 2023/2120 (INI) / A9-0414/2023 / P9_TA(2024)0035

Committee on Petitions

Date of adoption of the resolution: 17 January 2024

PE751.674

Competent Parliamentary Committee: Committee on Petitions (PETI)

European Parliament resolution of 17 January 2024 on the annual report on the activities of the European Ombudsman in 2022 (2023/2120(INI))

Brief analysis/ assessment of the resolution and requests made in it:

– having regard to the annual report on the activities of the European Ombudsman in 2022,

Every year the Committee on Petitions (‘PETI-Committee’) adopts an own-initiative report on the annual report on the activities of the European Ombudsman (‘Ombudsman’), currently Ms Emily O’REILLY. This report contains a motion for a resolution and is submitted to the plenary for a debate and a vote. The current resolution was adopted on 17 January 2024 and refers to the activities of the Ombudsman in 2022. According to an established procedure, the Commission replies in writing to the issues raised in the resolution concerning the Commission where replies are needed.

– having regard to Article 10(3) of the Treaty on European Union,

Response to requests and an overview of action taken, or intended to be taken, by the Commission:

– having regard to Articles 15, 24(3), 228 and 298(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU),

Paragraph 7 - The transparency of the interactions between the Commission and the Tobacco industry representatives

– having regard to Articles 11, 41, 42 and 43 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the ‘Charter’),

The Commission attaches particular importance to ensuring transparency of its interactions with representatives of the tobacco industry. It is clearly essential to comply with EU’s international commitments under the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (‘FCTC’).

– having regard to the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UN CRPD),

The Commission has a robust set of rules on ethics and integrity for Commission staff, and on transparency, combined with dedicated arrangements and actions applied by the Commission service (Directorate-General for Health and Food Safety) that holds the main responsibility for setting and implementing public health policies with regard to tobacco control. This provides an effective, proportionate and risk-based framework which protects the institutions from lobbying interference and ensures an adequate level of transparency in line with the FCTC obligations.

– having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2021/1163 of the European Parliament of 24 June 2021 laying down the regulations and general conditions governing the performance of the Ombudsman’s duties (Statute of the European Ombudsman) and repealing Decision 94/262/ECSC, EC, Euratom,

Commission Decisions 2014/839/EU, Euratom and 2014/838/EU, Euratom require the Members of the Commission, the members of their Cabinet and Directors-General of the Commission to publish information on all meetings they hold with interest representatives (lobbyists). Such information shall consist of the date of the meeting, the location, the name of the Member of the Commission and/or member of the Cabinet and/ or Director-General, the name of the organisation or self-employed individual and the subject of the meeting. Moreover, the Directorate-General for Health and Food Safety and Directorate-General for Taxation and Customs Union publish minutes of their meetings at all levels held with interest representatives of the tobacco industry. Finally, with regard to meetings at all levels held by other Commission departments with the tobacco industry, minutes of such meetings are subject to document management rules and procedures established by a Commission decision, and such documents can be subject to requests for public access to documents based on Regulation (EC) 1049/2001.

– having regard to the European Code of Good Administrative Behaviour, as adopted by Parliament on 6 September 2001,

The Commission has welcomed the Ombudsman’s strategic inquiry and has ensured all possible support to the Ombudsman in that context. The Commission has provided written replies to the preliminary findings and has taken due note of the Ombudsman’s decision and suggestion for improvement shared in December 2023.

– having regard to the Framework Agreement on Cooperation concluded between Parliament and the European Ombudsman on 15 March 2006, which entered into force on 1 April 2006,

In responding to the preliminary findings of the inquiry, the Commission also explained that it would instruct all Directors-General and Heads of Service, and all Heads of Cabinet, to conduct an assessment of the exposure of their Services to the lobbying by tobacco representatives in the context of health policies and policies related to tobacco control, and, in case of likely exposure, to put in place internal procedures, including requiring staff to publish minutes of meetings with tobacco representatives and providing a place of their publication. This step (implemented in March 2024) was welcomed by the Ombudsman in her decision.

– having regard to its previous resolutions on the European Ombudsman’s activities,

The Commission will report to the Ombudsman on the outcomes of that assessment and will also provide the Ombudsman with additional clarifications on certain of the Ombudsman’s observations contained in the decision.

– having regard to Rules 54 and 142(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

Paragraph 8 – An investigation to assess the level of independence of the EU Energy Platform Industry Advisory Group set up by the Commission

– having regard to the report of the Committee on Petitions (A9-0414/2023),

The Commission notes that the Ombudsman launched an investigation into the Industry Advisory Group (‘IAG’), a technical expert group under the EU Energy Platform. The investigation focuses on how the Commission decided on the composition of the IAG and how it ensures balanced representation of stakeholders.

A. whereas the annual report on the activities of the European Ombudsman in 2022 was formally submitted to the President of Parliament on 28 April 2023 and the Ombudsman, Ms Emily O’Reilly, presented the report to the Committee on Petitions in Brussels on 27 June 2023;

During interactions between the Ombudsman, the Secretariat-General and the Director-General for Energy, the latter explained that the IAG was set up in the context of the energy crisis and REPowerEU objectives, and that its purpose is to deliver technical industry know-how on procuring, trading and selling gas products in order to allow the Commission to launch an effective demand aggregation and joint purchasing platform for natural gas for EU companies, called AggregateEU.

B. whereas Articles 20, 24 and 228 TFEU empower the European Ombudsman to receive complaints concerning instances of maladministration in the activities of the Union institutions, bodies, offices or agencies, with the exception of the Court of Justice of the European Union acting in its judicial role;

The members of the IAG were selected to cover a variety of interests along the natural gas value chain with significant experience in buying or selling gas on international markets. The nature of the meetings is purely technical: no policy discussion took place in the IAG meetings and no policy advice was provided by its participants as reflected in the meeting-related documents the Commission publishes on the Transparency Register.

C. whereas Article 15 TFEU states that ‘in order to promote good governance and ensure the participation of civil society, the Union’s institutions, bodies, offices and agencies shall conduct their work as openly as possible’ and that ‘any citizen of the Union, and any natural or legal person residing or having its registered office in a Member State, shall have a right of access to documents of the Union’s institutions, bodies, offices and agencies’; whereas ensuring that high-quality services are provided to EU citizens and that the EU administration is responsive to their needs and concerns is crucial in protecting citizens’ rights and fundamental freedoms;

The selection of IAG members strictly followed the Commission’s horizontal rules on expert groups.

D. whereas Article 41 of the Charter on the right to good administration states that ‘every person has the right to have his or her affairs handled impartially, fairly and within a reasonable time by the institutions, bodies, offices and agencies of the Union’;

Paragraph 9 – Conflicts of interest of external experts involved in evaluating project proposals under the European Defence Fund

E. whereas Article 43 of the Charter states that ‘Any citizen of the Union and any natural or legal person residing or having its registered office in a Member State has the right to refer to the European Ombudsman cases of maladministration in the activities of the institutions, bodies, offices or agencies of the Union, with the exception of the Court of Justice of the European Union acting in its judicial role’;

The Commission agrees with the European Parliament on the importance of an effective management of conflicts of interests for the integrity of the evaluation and selection of proposals under the European Defence Fund (‘EDF’) programme, as highlighted by the Ombudsman inquiry.

F. whereas Article 298(1) TFEU establishes that ‘in carrying out their missions, the institutions, bodies, offices and agencies of the Union shall have the support of an open, efficient and independent European administration’;

To this end, this effective management builds on several steps in the process of selecting, recruiting, and using the independent experts that assist in the ethics screening and assessment of the EDF proposals (in compliance with the Financial Regulation applicable to the Union Budget and the provisions in the EDF Regulation).

G. whereas in 2022, the Ombudsman opened 348 inquiries, of which 344 were complaint-based and 4 own-initiative, while closing 330 inquiries (325 complaint-based and 5 own-initiative);

The Commission will also elaborate on this process in its mid-term evaluation of the EDF programme that will be presented to the European Parliament and the Council.

H. whereas in 2022, the vast majority of the inquiries concerned the Commission (197 inquiries or 57,1 %), while the next largest numbers concerned the European Personnel Selection Office (22 inquiries or 6,3 %), the European Parliament (19 inquiries or 5,5 %), and the European External Action Service (16 inquiries or 4,6 %); whereas the remaining inquiries were distributed as follows: the European Border and Coast Guard Agency (Frontex) (14 inquiries or 4,3 %), the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (7 inquiries or 2 %), other EU institutions or bodies (46 inquiries or 13,5 %), and other EU agencies (23 inquiries or 6,7 %);

Paragraph 10 – The Commission’s proposal to amend the Financial Regulation to include the option to reject tenderers if they have a conflict of interest in all procedures related to public procurement

I. whereas in 2022, the largest percentage of the Ombudsman’s inquiries concerned the Commission, whose administrative activities receive considerable public attention, given that it is the EU executive;

As regards the financial actors, Article 61 of the Financial Regulation currently in force sets rules to declare and avoid or correct conflicts of interest detected. It applies to financial actors and other persons, including national authorities at any level, involved in budget implementation under direct, indirect and shared management, including acts preparatory thereto, audit or control. In 2021, the Commission adopted the Guidance on the avoidance and management of conflicts of interest under the Financial Regulation, to raise awareness and to promote a uniform interpretation and application of the new rules and clarify its main elements.

J. whereas in the inquiries closed by the Ombudsman in 2022, no maladministration was found in 37 % of cases, a solution was settled by the institution in 46,1 % of cases, no further inquiries were justified in 12,7 % of cases and maladministration was found in 4,5 % of cases;

As regards the prevention of professional conflicting interests on the side of economic operators or tenderers that may negatively affect performance of a procurement contract, we confirm that the proposal for revision of the Financial Regulation (Recast) (COM(2022) 223 final), as provisionally agreed by the European Parliament and the Council on 7 December 2023, contains changes reinforcing the current provisions. This was obtained by adding in the definition of professional conflicting interests a reference to the national law applicable to the members of staff of a national authority (Article 61(2) of the Recast) as well as an explicit ground for rejecting participants from award procedures for such reasons (Article 144(1), point (d) of the Recast). It provides a legal ground to reject a tenderer who has conflicting interests which may negatively affect the performance of the contract. In addition, all tenderers, and, where appropriate, entities on whose capacity the economic operator intends to rely, as well as envisaged subcontractors, must submit a declaration on honour confirming that they do not have any professional conflicting interests, and provide relevant information when required (point 18.4 of Annex I). Finally, the proposal highlights the contracting authority’s obligation to assess whether there are such professional conflicting interests (point 20.1 of Annex I).

K. whereas the top three concerns in the inquiries closed by the Ombudsman in 2022 were transparency and accountability (e.g. access to information and documents) (32 %), culture of service (20 %) and respect for fundamental rights (15 %); whereas other concerns included proper use of discretion (including in infringement procedures), recruitment, good management of personnel issues, respect for procedural rights, proper management of infringement procedures, sound financial management, ethics and public participation in EU decision-making;

As regards the guidance on procurement, the Commission has already updated its guidance (e.g. Vademecum on public procurement) interpreting the existing rules on professional conflicting interests for all EU Institutions. It provides guidance on how to:

L. whereas in 2022, the Ombudsman asked the Council to grant faster access to legislative documents so that the public can effectively participate in discussions on draft EU laws;

draft the tender specifications to include selection criteria related to professional conflicting interests;

M. whereas the Ombudsman found maladministration, in how the Commission handled a public access request for text messages between its President and the CEO of a pharmaceutical company (Pfizer);

evaluate the presence of conflicting interests;

N. whereas in 2022, the Ombudsman opened an inquiry into how the European Central Bank (ECB) handles ‘revolving doors’;

reject tenderers in cases where it has been established that the presence of such interests affects their capacity to perform the contract in an independent, impartial and objective manner.

O. whereas the Ombudsman opened a strategic inquiry into the systemic and significant delays in how the Commission handles requests for public access to documents; whereas the Ombudsman found maladministration in the Commission's way of handling such requests, notably in dealing with requests to review initial decisions (‘confirmatory applications’);

Moreover, after the adoption of the Financial Regulation (Recast), the guidance on procurement will be further updated to reflect the changes in the new regulation.

P. whereas in 2022, the Ombudsman also conducted wider strategic inquiries and initiatives into systemic issues in the EU institutions, covering ethical issues, ‘revolving doors’ moves, accountability in decision-making, access to documents and fundamental rights;

Paragraph 11 – The issue of ‘revolving doors’ for Commission staff

Q. whereas in 2022, the Ombudsman issued a recommendation to the Council to grant full public access to the requested legislative documents, following an inquiry into the Council’s refusal to do so in the context of negotiations on the draft ‘Digital Markets Act’, following which the Ombudsman concluded that there was maladministration;

On 16 of May 2022, the Ombudsman issued a closing decision relating to her strategic inquiry (launched in 2021) on how the Commission manages ‘revolving doors’ situations of its staff members. Although the Ombudsman had not identified any case of maladministration among the 100 files examined and issued no formal recommendations, the Ombudsman concluded that the Commission should apply a more robust approach when managing ‘revolving doors’ moves of its most senior current and former staff members. The Commission replied to the Ombudsman on 31 October 2022.

R. whereas in 2022, the Ombudsman’s Office further raised public awareness of the Ombudsman’s role in maintaining high accountability and transparency standards in EU administration;

The Commission replied to the closing decision of the Ombudsman inquiry on “how the Commission manages ‘revolving door’ moves of its staff members”.

S. whereas the Ombudsman decided to launch a public consultation on transparency and participation in EU decision-making related to the environment, in the light of the climate emergency and environmental and ecosystem degradation, with a view to assessing the EU's approach, as a party to the Aarhus Convention, in ensuring a high level of public access to environmental information and public participation in decision-making relating to the environment;

The Commission noted with satisfaction that the Ombudsman had not found any single instance of maladministration in the 100 Commission decisions her team had examined. The Ombudsman closed the inquiry without recommendations. This in itself confirms that the Commission’s approach is sound, in line with the rules and does not require systemic improvements.

T. whereas in 2022, the Ombudsman urged the Commission to treat access to document requests concerning EU recovery funds with greater consistency and to better explain its reasoning when deciding not to release the asked-for information;

The Commission also noted that the inquiry found genuine improvements since the matter was last examined in 2019.

U. whereas in 2022, the Ombudsman opened an inquiry into the Commission’s refusal to give public access to documents related to its proposal for a regulation on the European Health Data Space;

The Commission is fully committed to driving the highest ethical standards and maintaining public trust in the integrity and transparency of its decision-making and the integrity of its staff. It implements the existing rules in an effective, robust, and proportionate manner for all categories of staff, including senior managers. Where necessary, the Commission imposes strict mitigating measures to envisaged activities of senior managers and, in certain cases, even forbids them. As regards information on post-service activities of senior managers, the Commission is strictly following the rules in the Staff Regulations, approved by the Parliament and the Council, which provide for an annual publication on cases assessed concerning post service activities of former senior officials.

V. whereas in 2022, the Ombudsman opened an inquiry into how the Commission dealt with a request for public access to declarations of interests from the members of its Regulatory Scrutiny Board;

The Commission welcomed the suggestions of the Ombudsman. While the Commission considers that it is not possible to implement all of them within the applicable legal framework, the Commission committed to examine further measures to protect the public interest and its reputation even more vigorously.

W. whereas the Ombudsman has underlined that the EU rules on public procurement are not robust or clear enough to prevent conflicts of interest and has criticised the Commission for its insufficient critical scrutiny before awarding a contract to carry out a study on integrating environmental, social and governance objectives into EU banking rules to BlackRock Investment Management, a company that manages investments in the fossil fuel and banking sectors, which are areas that fall under the new environmental, social and governance rules;

Paragraph 14 - The strengthening of the Code of Conduct for Commissioners to improve lobbying transparency and ethics and the creation of a public record of meetings between Commissioners and lobbyists

1. Approves the annual report for 2022 presented by the European Ombudsman;

The Commission has already strict rules in place on lobbying transparency in relation to Commissioners and their Cabinets. Article 7(1) of Commission Decision of 31 January 2018 on a Code of Conduct for the Members of the Commission sets out that the Members and members of their Cabinets shall meet only those organisations or self-employed individuals, which are registered in the Transparency Register established pursuant to the relevant Interinstitutional Agreement in as much as they fall under its scope. In addition, in accordance with Article 7(2) of the Code of Conduct for the Members of the Commission and Article 1 of Commission Decision 2014/839/EU, Euratom, Members of the Commission shall make public information on all meetings held by them and members of their Cabinet with organisations or self-employed individuals on issues relating to policy-making and implementation in the Union. The Commission publishes systematically such information in a standardised format on the websites of the Members of the Commission within two weeks following the meeting. A list of published meetings is also made available on the entry of the registrant concerned in the Transparency Register.

2. Congratulates Emily O’Reilly on her good work and her continuous efforts to improve administrative practices and to promote accountability and full transparency of the EU institutions, bodies, offices and agencies, as well as to ensure accessibility of EU documents for EU citizens;

Pursuant to Article 6(2) of the Code, the Commission also publishes an overview of mission expenses per Member every two months covering all missions undertaken. A link to the relevant information can be found on each Member’s respective website.

3. Expresses its appreciation for the continued constructive cooperation of the European Ombudsman with the European Parliament, and notably with the Committee on Petitions, as well as with other EU institutions; reiterates its commitment to support the Ombudsman in the performance of her duties;

Paragraph 16 - The transparency of EU environmental decision-making (failure to consider properly the environmental impact of the EU-Mercosur trade agreement, shortcomings in handling requests on public access to environmental information, etc.)

4. Congratulates the Ombudsman’s Office for the significant improvement in its efficiency rate for the length of inquiry for closed cases, which improved from 13 months on average in 2013 to less than 6 months on average in 2022; underlines that the achieved results cover several areas of EU administration with limited resources;

In the Commission, the Directorate-General for Trade is responsible for the implementation of the trade policy of then Union. In this context, it negotiates Trade and Sustainable Development Chapters in trade agreements to ensure that parties respect core national and international environmental commitments. The Directorate-General for Environment actively participates in the negotiation and subsequent implementation of Trade and Sustainable Development Chapters in trade agreements. While trade policy contributes to projecting EU environmental policies at global level, describing the negotiations between the EU and Mercosur as “EU environmental decision-making” constitutes a misrepresentation of trade negotiations. As regards the claims related to transparency, the Directorate-General for Trade continues to apply a transparent approach to all stages of EU trade negotiations, in line with the commitments reinstated in the Trade Policy Review ‘An Open, Sustainable and Assertive Trade Policy’. The Commission carried out all the due diligence during the EU-Mercosur negotiations to ensure that the envisaged Agreement complied with existing human rights obligations and did not lower the existing standards of human rights, social and environmental protection. In this respect, the Commission did not conduct just one, but two Strategic Impact (‘SIA’) Assessments and the second SIA was not concluded before the end of the negotiations. This was not possible, because negotiations were still ongoing until 30 January 2024, and technical discussions are continuing. Moreover, civil society was able to provide comments to the interim report for several months.

5. Calls on the Council to fully comply with the transparency standards of a parliamentary and participatory democracy, as required under the Treaties and requested by the Ombudsman; recalls that the Court of Justice of the EU stipulated that the principles of publicity and transparency are inherent to the EU legislative process and that the lack of transparency and information weakens citizens’ trust in the legitimacy of the EU legislative process as a whole;

In addition, the Commission does not agree that the Ombudsman, in her Annual Report 2022, identified shortcomings in how the Commission handles requests for public access to environmental information. The Ombudsman rather underlined that citizens could be more involved in the preparation and implementation of green policies, and that she has launched a public consultation to assess the transparency of EU environmental decision-making.

6. Calls on the Council to grant citizens timely access to its legislative documents during ongoing legislative procedures in order to fully uphold citizens’ Treaty-based right to participate in the democratic life of the Union, which would in turn enhance citizens' trust in the overall EU decision-making process;

Paragraph 17 - The transparency of national plans under the Recovery and Resilience Facility (‘RRF’)

7. Welcomes the opening of the own-initiative inquiry to assess how the Commission ensures that its interactions with tobacco industry representatives are transparent; underlines that the failure of the Commission as a whole to proactively publish details of its meetings with tobacco lobbyists amounted to maladministration, as indicated by the Ombudsman in her preliminary findings; recalls that the EU signed and formally confirmed the World Health Organization’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control and is obliged to comply with its provisions establishing that interactions with the tobacco industry should take place only when strictly necessary from a regulatory point of view, as well as to make those interactions transparent, in order to prevent the tobacco industry from having a negative impact on public health policies;

The Commission acknowledges the importance of high standards of transparency and accountability in the implementation of the RRF. Since the beginning of the RRF implementation, the Commission has made significant efforts to further reinforce the quality and transparency of the information provided on the RRF, in line with the requests expressed by the European Parliament as part of the last discharge exercise as well as the Ombudsman.

8. Considers it paramount that the Ombudsman launch an investigation to assess the level of independence of the EU Energy Platform Industry Advisory Group set up by the Commission;

In this context, the Commission welcomes the fact that in September 2023 the Ombudsman closed her strategic own-initiative inquiry on the transparency and accountability in the implementation of the RRF welcoming the progress made since the start of her initiative. The Commission has taken due note of the suggestions provided by the Ombudsman for further improvement, as well as those of the European Parliament, and will closely consider how to implement them with the aim of further increasing transparency, while considering the limits of the legal framework and operational constraints.

9. Endorses the result of the Ombudsman’s examination of how the Commission ensures that external experts involved in evaluating project proposals under the European Defence Fund do not have conflicts of interest; underlines the paramount importance of carrying out a thorough assessment of conflicts of interest before appointing experts and of making sure that transparency and ethics obligations are robustly implemented;

The Commission has and will continue to share all Recovery and Resilience Plans (‘RRPs’) and modified plans submitted by the Member States with the European Parliament and Council, as well as all preliminary assessments of payment requests. In addition to the important amount of information on the implementation of the RRF in each Member State published on the Recovery and Resilience Scoreboard, the Commission also proactively publishes a considerable volume of documents on its webpage on the RRF, including its proposals for Council implementing decisions approving RRPs (and links to the adopted decisions), the Commission Staff Working Documents accompanying the assessment, operational arrangements and its preliminary assessments of payment requests.

10. Welcomes the Commission’s proposal, in response to the Ombudsman’s findings following her inquiry into the BlackRock case, to amend the Financial Regulation to include the option to reject tenderers if they have a conflict of interest; calls on the Commission to comply fully with the Ombudsman’s suggestions by adopting strengthened and clearer rules aimed at preventing any conflicts of interest in all procedures related to public procurement, including for its internal guidelines;

Moreover, in 2023, the Commission launched an interactive map for RRF projects. It also published three methodological notes to clarify the application of the RRF Regulation (satisfactory fulfilment of milestones and targets, suspension of payments and reversal of milestones and targets). The Commission will continue updating the Recovery and Resilience Scoreboard, its website and the interactive map to ensure that they reflect up-to-date data.

11. Highlights the fact that, following an inquiry by the Ombudsman into the phenomenon of ‘revolving doors’, the Commission is improving its handling of the issue and requests information from former staff on how they are complying with relevant restrictions; notes the faster publishing by the Commission of an annual overview of senior staff members requesting permission to move to new employment, and its assessment of these requests; underlines that the Commission should not grant any authorisation where the concerned employment cannot be made subject to restrictions that adequately mitigate the risks of conflicts of interest or where those restrictions cannot be credibly monitored and enforced, including the obligation for the new employer to make the restrictions public; believes that the Commission should publish information in a timely manner on all post-service activities of senior former staff members that it assesses, thus improving public scrutiny of these decisions, which is essential for monitoring purposes; welcomes the fact that staff on unpaid leave are forbidden from taking employment in areas where there is a risk of conflict of interest; encourages the Ombudsman to monitor the Commission’s handling of these issues;

Furthermore, the last RRF annual report and the Annual Activity Reports of the Commission’s Secretariat-General and the Directorate-General for Economic and Financial Affairs include a detailed presentation of the audit work conducted by the Commission on the RRF.

12. Welcomes the own-initiative inquiry opened by the Ombudsman to assess how the ECB manages the issue of ‘revolving doors’ and endorses the call of the Ombudsman to the ECB to apply stricter rules governing staff moves to the private sector; supports the recommendation that ECB staff should be subject to strict cooling-off requirements and that the period during which former ECB staff are banned from lobbying their former colleagues should be increased;

Regarding the information on final recipients, the amendments to Regulation (EU) 2021/241 (RRF Regulation), which entered into force in 2023, require each Member State to publish information on the 100 final recipients receiving the highest amounts of RRF funding. By the end of 2023, all the Member States had provided data, all of which is fully available to the public on the Recovery and Resilience Scoreboard. Member States are expected to update this data twice a year.

13. Underlines that Qatargate shed a new light on lobbying and policymaking in the EU; acknowledges the Ombudsman’s critical assessment of the scandal and welcomes the development of new measures designed at improving the integrity standards within the European Parliament to safeguard EU democracy; considers these actions as an important first step to enhance the EU regulatory framework, as they aim to foster higher ethics and anti-corruption standards and thereby make the EU institutions examples of integrity and accountability;

With respect to access to documents requests in particular, Commission services strive to process the many requests on the RRF as swiftly as possible, in line with the principles and processes laid down in Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001. As of January 2024, the Commission had received more than 180 requests for access to documents on the RRF. For these requests, the Commission has disclosed more than 2,000 documents related to different national plans and the RRF as a whole.

14. Welcomes the continuous efforts of the Ombudsman to improve lobbying transparency and ethics, in particular by requiring the Commission to strengthen the Code of Conduct for Commissioners, create a public record of meetings between Commissioners and lobbyists and proactively publish Commissioners’ travel expenses;

Paragraphs 18 and 19 - The transparency and balanced interest representation under the common agricultural policy (‘CAP’)

15. Underlines that the participation of citizens in EU decision-making is important for its legitimacy; appreciates the Ombudsman’s commitment to foster accountability in EU decision-making, especially in the area of environmental decisions; welcomes and supports the Ombudsman’s requests to the European Investment Bank (EIB) to take several transparency steps to enable the public to more easily see the potential environmental impact of the projects it finances, as well as the Ombudsman’s intention to step up her scrutiny of the EIB's activities, in the light of the EIB's insufficient follow-up to date, in particular regarding the timely publishing of information about projects related to the environment and EIB finances in order to give sufficient time to the public to raise concerns;

The Commission has opted for maximum transparency in the CAP Strategic Plans approval process. In line with the requirements of the Regulation (EU) No 2021/2115 on support for the CAP Strategic Plans, Member States have conducted consultations in preparing the CAP Strategic Plans (‘CSPs’). Each CAP Strategic Plan (‘CSP’) is country specific, defined at Member State level by the national authorities. The strategy and interventions planned are the result of a SWOT analysis carried out by the Member States, thus addressing its specific needs. As each CSP strikes a unique balance between the identified needs and the policy objectives the Plan contributes to, a direct comparison between different CSPs is not possible.

16. Commends the Ombudsman’s work in prioritising her assessment of the transparency of EU environmental decision-making, following, inter alia, her finding of maladministration in the Commission’s failure to consider properly the environmental impact of the EU-Mercosur trade agreement before concluding negotiation, the Commission’s severe shortcomings in handling requests on public access to environmental information and the lack of clear rules to ensure that experts the Commission consults, in the context of environmental policymaking, are not subject to conflicts of interest;

All CSPs are complete, containing all elements requested by the legislation, and have been approved by the Commission. During the drafting of the CSPs, the so-called partnership approach has been followed, meaning the involvement of relevant stakeholders at national and regional levels. In view of ensuring maximum transparency, the observation letters by the Commission to the Member States (for the initial approval) as well as all approval decisions, both the original ones and the ones on amendments to the CSP, are published.

17. Underlines that the Ombudsman found regrettable the fact that proactive transparency mainly happened only after the national plans under the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) had already been approved, thus preventing the public from adequately following the negotiations; is concerned about the lengthy delays that the Commission has been incurring in dealing with requests for public access to RRF-related documents, in some cases taking one year or more; urges the Commission to encourage the Member States to use a public portal to list all recipients of funding under the RRF, to continue publishing its preliminary assessments of Member States’ payment requests and to inform the public with concrete details about its supervisory and audit work in order to ensure meaningful accountability for all funds spent, welcomes the publication by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, in collaboration with the European Ombudsman’s Office, of the policy paper entitled ‘Towards good practice principles for government transparency in the use of recovery funds’, which provides guidance to governments on ensuring transparency and accountability in the use of COVID-19 recovery funds, welcomes, in this regard, the Ombudsman’s efforts to improve the transparency standards related to the RRF;

To the Commission’s knowledge, all CSPs have been published on dedicated national websites that Member States set up. Links to these national websites are made available also on the Europa website. In addition, the Commission aiming for greater transparency, developed and published brief highlights of the adopted Plans. These are available in English and in the national language of the MS and were very much appreciated by stakeholders. Also, up to date information on the implementation of the CSPs is regularly presented by the Member States to its stakeholders in the Monitoring Committees.

18. Highlights that in her strategic initiative concerning how the Commission ensured transparency and balanced interest representation under the common agricultural policy (CAP), the Ombudsman found that key elements of the CAP national strategic plans, including specific measures on budget items and milestones to be fulfilled, were missing, thus making it difficult for citizens and interested parties to understand the conditions under which Member States could use the assistance provided by the new CAP; supports the Ombudsman’s call on the Commission to proactively disclose more information concerning the approval of Member States’ strategic plans under the CAP; asks the Commissioner for Agriculture and his cabinet, as well as the Commission’s Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development, to comply with the Ombudsman’s recommendations and seek a fair and balanced representation of the interests of both farmers and civil society in its meetings and exchanges with interest representatives, given that, as pointed out by the Ombudsman in her letter of February 2022, the Commissioner for Agriculture and his cabinet held more meetings with industry representatives than with environmental organisations and other organisations like research institutions; requests that the Commission assume an active role in securing compliance with the transparency obligations imposed on the Member States, including the obligation to disclose the broader entities that beneficiaries of funds belong to and the obligation to publish the total amount of payments received by a beneficiary, with a view to guaranteeing that the public has access to all necessary information about beneficiaries of CAP funding;

Regarding meetings of the Commission services with stakeholders, the Commission is of the opinion that the number of meetings with individual stakeholders is not a reliable indicator of the balance of the interests represented. The Cabinet of the Commissioner for Agriculture and the Directorate-General for Agriculture are available and keen to meet all stakeholders upon demand, as shown over the years. The Directorate-General for Agriculture and the Commissioner have been promoting environmental and climate objectives in meetings with farmers representatives. Farmers are the main drivers of the shift towards greater sustainability in agriculture and the main providers of the public goods supported by the CAP. In addition, the Directorate-General for Agriculture regularly organises meetings of Civil Dialogue Groups at the EU level.

19. Regrets that the Commission’s approach to setting up civil dialogue groups for matters covered by the CAP did not comply with the Ombudsman’s recommendations and had several gaps, in particular a failure to transparently and clearly implement a balanced representation between economic and non-economic interests in the composition of the groups;

The Directorate-General for Agriculture also finances and supports activities of the EU CAP Network with the aim to promote the greater engagement of all stakeholder types and exchange of information. Information on the EU CAP network’s activities, including events, their outcomes and highlights reports, is available and publicly accessible at the network’s website. The EU CAP network is put in place in accordance with Article 126(5) of Regulation (EU) No 2021/2115 to support the networking of national networks, organisations, and administrations in the field of agriculture and rural development at Union level. New developments in this area have happened after 21 June 2022, the date of the Commission reply to the Ombudsman. Thus, exchange of information, knowledge and good practices with and among stakeholders has been facilitated in the framework of the EU CAP network, launched in October 2022 by merging the former European Network for Rural Development (ENRD) and EIP-AGRI (agricultural European Innovation Partnership) network. Among other events, the EU CAP network organised in March and May 2023 a thematic group on “CAP Strategic Plans: Towards Implementation”, which provided an opportunity to bring together a selection of EU level stakeholders alongside Managing Authorities and Paying Agencies involved in the design and implementation of CSPs to exchange on the key features, challenges and processes required to take the CSPs forward. Another thematic group, on the “CAP Strategic Plans: Monitoring Committees” has been launched in September 2023 to exchange on the design and operation of Monitoring Committees as part of wider governance of CSPs implementation at national and sub-national levels and on how Managing Authorities ensure the involvement of relevant stakeholders.

20. Emphasises the importance for all institutions of treating access to documents requests in a timely manner, so that the relevance of the information is preserved; supports the Ombudsman’s special report in her strategic inquiry concerning the time the Commission takes to deal with requests for public access to documents; is concerned about the Commission’s systemic and significant delays in processing such requests; underlines that public access to documents is a fundamental right under Regulation 1049/2001; urges the Commission to improve its administrative practices in order to respect the timelines set out by the legislator and to clearly and proactively demonstrate that transparency is the rule and a priority in its handling of requests for public access to documents; stresses the need for the EU institutions to dedicate sufficient human resources to improving efficiency in the handling of access to documents requests; recalls that the Ombudsman recommended a fundamental restructuring of the Commission’s approach to processing access to document requests;

Concerning transparency on how CAP funds are spent, the Commission is fully committed in ensuring to the public the broadest access to information while striking the right balance between the rights of citizens in a democratic society and the protection of the privacy of the data.

21. Acknowledges the Ombudsman’s inquiry into the Commission’s failure to identify and therefore to assess the potential disclosure of the text messages exchanged between the Commission President and the CEO of a pharmaceutical company on the purchase of a COVID-19 vaccine; is worried that the Commission’s approach constituted maladministration; underlines that work-related text and instant messages are ‘documents’ under Regulation 1049/2001 and stresses that respecting this principle is of particular importance; welcomes the Ombudsman’s recommendations for the EU administration on the recording of work-related text and instant messages; stresses the importance for the EU institutions of fully complying with these recommendations in order to bring the practices of the EU administration into line with modern communication methods; takes note of the Commission’s response that it will issue further guidance on modern communication tools such as text messages;

The rules for the 2023-2027 CAP provide for enhanced transparency. Regulation (EU) 2021/2116, Articles 98-100 and Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/128, Chapter VI Articles 58-62, contain the ruleset concerning transparency publication. In detail, Member States must publish: the name of the beneficiary; name of the operation, start and end date; total cost of the operation; fund concerned; specific objective concerned; Union co-financing rate; municipality.

22. Calls on the Council to learn a lesson from the Ombudsman’s inquiry into its refusal to give full public access to documents related to negotiations on the draft ‘Digital Markets Act’, which, in 2022, resulted in the Ombudsman’s conclusion that there was maladministration; calls on the Council to apply the highest standards of transparency in these cases, especially when the Ombudsman has already identified problems in previous strategic inquiries concerning the transparency of its legislative process and its decision-making during the COVID-19 crisis; recalls that transparency is one of the key principles set out in the EU Treaties and that a lack of transparency risks diminishing citizens’ trust in the European institutions and the EU as a whole;

The 2023-2027 CAP framework provides in particular that Member States will also be obliged to collect from beneficiaries and publish data on identification of the group of undertakings (parent company), to which they belong and to keep that information up to date. For the CAP the data is aggregated in one reporting system per Member State, thus facilitating data access.

23. Stresses the importance of the Ombudsman’s investigations into human rights compliance by the EU administration; supports the Ombudsman’s call for the Commission to set up a new and separate complaint handling portal for alleged human rights abuses, and to make it accessible for human rights-related complaints by civil society organisations and other stakeholders in countries with which the EU has trade deals;

Member States have an obligation to publish data on all their CAP beneficiaries on an annual basis by 31 May of the financial year in question. Moreover, in line with the Union legislation, Member States’ website should allow for filtering and extraction of data. The Commission is making sure Member States publish the data on time and that all required functionalities are in place.

24. Points out that the Ombudsman conducted a strategic inquiry into how Frontex complies with its fundamental rights and transparency obligations under its expanded mandate under Regulation 2019/1896, stresses the importance of applying high transparency standards to allow for public scrutiny and of ensuring full respect for fundamental rights in all of Frontex’s operations to improve its accountability; calls on Frontex to ensure an adequate follow-up to the recommendations issued by the Ombudsman;

Commission has successfully revised the legal and procedural framework needed to ensure the continuity of the civil dialogue with stakeholders which started operating as from 2023. The organisation of Civil Dialogue Groups in matters covered by the common agricultural policy is set up by the new Commission Decision (EU) 2022/1368 of 3 August 2022.

25. Notes the Ombudsman’s inquiry into the Commission’s system monitoring the Croatian authorities’ respect for fundamental rights in the context of border management operations supported by EU funds, in the conclusion of which the Ombudsman criticised the Commission for its delay in setting up an appropriate monitoring mechanism for border management by the Croatian authorities; urges the Commission to always react promptly to the Ombudsman’s suggestions for improvement, in particular in cases like this one, when significant shortcomings are identified;

The new Civil Dialogue Groups governance differs in substance from the organisation set up by the Commission Decision 2013/767/EU of 16 December 2013. What prevails is an equal access to the system for all stakeholders which responded to the call for application and fulfilled the selection criteria.

26. Welcomes the fact that, on the basis of the Ombudsman’s practical recommendations on the use of official languages when communicating with the public, the network of EU agencies agreed on the guidelines on multilingual policies;

The recent reform represents a concrete step forward in the direction of a more balanced composition of the Civil dialogue groups. The Commission has achieved this result in particular by granting a single membership to each organisation, instead of distributing several seats to each of the larger organisations, as it was done under the previous system. Moreover, the Commission has taken up the role of the Chair, to facilitate and objectivise the consultation process, by ensuring that all voices are heard and various opinions can be expressed.

27. Takes note that in 2022, the Statute of the European Ombudsman was updated with implementing provisions detailing the working procedures of the Ombudsman’s Office; believes that the new provisions will contribute to improving the Ombudsman’s work;

The new Civil Dialogue Groups governance is open, transparent and inclusive for both economic and non-economic actors. The guiding principle of the reform was to guarantee a balanced representation and equal status of the wide range of interest groups, which represent, as broadly as possible, different stakes and viewpoints regarding developments in Directorate-General for Agriculture policy area. The final balance achieved in expert groups depends on the number and quality of responses which Commission receives to its calls for applications.

28. Welcomes the Ombudsman’s commitment to monitor the EU administration’s implementation of the UN CRPD; appreciates the Ombudsman’s work as a member of the EU Framework for the UN CRPD;

The Commission is of the opinion that, rather than adopting a definition of 'balance' for each group, efforts should be made in order to make selection processes more transparent and inclusive. This goal was achieved in the course of the recent reform of the agricultural Civil Dialogue Groups.

29. Underlines the results of the Ombudsman’s own-initiative inquiry into how the Commission monitors EU Structural and Investment Funds to ensure that funds are used to strengthen the rights of persons with disabilities to independent living and inclusion; welcomes the suggestion of clearer guidance about the need to promote deinstitutionalisation in the context of the use of EU Structural and Investment Funds;

Paragraph 20 - The treatment of access to documents requests in a timely manner under Regulation 1049/2001

30. Encourages the Ombudsman to continue the exchanges on experiences and best practices with national ombudsmen through the European Network of Ombudsmen (ENO); appreciates that the 2022 ENO annual conference focused on best practices for helping refugees and addressed the effects of the digitalisation of public services on citizens’ rights; commends the addition of the Ukrainian and Moldovan ombudsman’s offices to the ENO;

Dealing with requests for public access to documents is a matter of great importance for the Commission as an EU Institution committed to transparency.

31. Welcomes the Ombudsman’s continuous efforts to further improve the visibility of its activities, including via online tools and the multilingual website offering assistance in all 24 official languages of the EU;

Data show a high level of transparency of the Commission, as full or partial access is granted to the vast majority of the documents requested. Full or partial access was granted in 77% of the cases at the initial stage in 2022, and wider or even full access was granted in 51% of the cases reviewed at confirmatory stage in that same year. This data not only confirms the openness of the Commission, but also its commitment to the right to access documents as part of its overall transparency policy.

32. Welcomes the fruitful, long-standing dialogue between the Ombudsman and the European Parliament’s Committee on Petitions; underlines that the intensive collaboration between these two bodies helps to increase the democratic accountability of the EU institutions and bring them closer to citizens;

Most requests for public access to documents submitted to the Commission (84% of all the initial requests received by the Commission) are handled in a timely manner, in full compliance with the Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001. The delays signalled by the Ombudsman concern mainly requests from applicants to review the initial replies of the institution (the so-called ‘confirmatory applications’), which represents approximately 4.4% of all the requests received by the Commission. In the context of the inquiry of the Ombudsman, the Commission duly explained the main reasons behind the delays in the handling of confirmatory requests (including inter alia the ever-growing number of initial and confirmatory applications, the ever-wider scope and the higher degree of complexity of the requests).

33. Instructs its President to forward this resolution and the report of the Committee on Petitions to the Council, the Commission, the European Ombudsman, the governments and parliaments of the Member States, and their ombudsmen or similar competent bodies.

The Commission has allocated more resources to deal with confirmatory applications and is already implementing most of the recommendations of the Ombudsman in her own-initiative inquiry on the matter. The Commission is in constant contact with the Ombudsman on this topic.

The Commission stands ready to engage in the discussion with the European Parliament on this matter in the light of the findings of the Special Report of the Ombudsman and explain what it does to enhance the handling of the requests for public access to documents.

Paragraph 21 - The recording of work-related text and instant messages

The Commission took note of the practical recommendation for the EU administration on the recording of work-related text and instant messages. In an effort to ensure greater certainty for the Commission in the application of Regulation (EC) 1049/2001, the Commission announced its intention to issue further guidance on communication tools such as text and instant messages.

To ensure consistency, the Commission reached out to the other EU institutions and bodies and proposed to draw up together guidance for the staff of the institutions on the use of communication tools in EU professional context. This exercise is ongoing.

Paragraph 23 - The setting up by the Commission of a new and separate complaint handling portal for alleged human rights abuses

The Commission shares the importance attached by the Parliament and by the Ombudsman to ensuring that EU citizens, organisations and other stakeholders have clear channels to raise concerns, particularly, regarding human rights abuses. Depending on the nature and specific situation concerning the alleged abuses, responsibility may fall either to the Commission or the European External Action Service with whom we work closely in such an important area.

The Commission’s view as expressed in its reply to the Ombudsman is that clear and appropriate channels already exist reflecting these shared responsibilities. For example, the Commission’s Single-Entry Point in the trade area allows stakeholders to raise issues related to EU trade instruments, including specific human rights concerns, while such human rights concerns can be and are also communicated directly to the Commission and the European External Action Service, both in headquarters and EU Delegations. In addition, the European External Action Service systematically and proactively seeks input from stakeholders - notably civil society organisations and human right defenders - from both the EU and third countries in the context of the political and human rights dialogues held with third countries. This practice is also replicated in the Generalised Scheme of Preferences context, reaching beyond just the countries with which the EU has trade agreements. For these reasons, the Commission is not convinced that attempting to reorganise these contacts or focus them exclusively in the Commission via a new or additional channel would not bring added value.

Paragraph 25 - The delay of the Commission in setting up an appropriate monitoring mechanism for border management by the Croatian authorities

The Commission has underlined to the Croatian authorities that the most effective way to respond to allegations related to possible violations of fundamental rights is through prompt and systematic follow-up investigations that are transparent as regards to their outcome. The responsibility to carry out such investigations lies with the national authorities in accordance with national law. Croatia has set up an Independent Monitoring Mechanism (IMM), which entered into force on 8 June 2021 based on the agreement between the Croatian authorities and Croatian stakeholders. It gives the possibility to directly conduct Independent Monitoring Mechanism activities. Subsequently, the 2nd Cooperation agreement was signed in November 2022, and for the implementation of the renewed IMM.

The Commission works with the Croatian authorities to support them in the implementation of the IMM as part of the Advisory Board, while the implementation of the IMM is within the mandate of the Coordination Board. The Commission has an advisory role in the implementation of the Independent Monitoring Mechanism, as member of the IMM Advisory Board. The Advisory Board, an informal body that is not part of the IMM, can only issue recommendations to the Coordination Board, and ultimately address them to the Croatian Ministry on how to improve the transparency and the independence of the monitoring mechanism. The Advisory Board includes representatives from the Commission and relevant EU agencies as well national human rights institutions and various national institutions whose mandates include overseeing fundamental rights compliance. In line with the Ombudsman’s suggestions, the Commission, as member of the Advisory Board, will continue to provide recommendations both to the Coordination Board and to the Croatian authorities, in view of the further improvements of the IMM.

Paragraph 29 - The monitoring of EU Structural and Investment Funds to ensure that funds are used to strengthen the rights of persons with disabilities to independent living and inclusion and the need for clearer guidance about the need to promote deinstitutionalisation in the context of the use of EU Structural and Investment Funds

As a flagship from the Strategy for the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, the Commission will publish Guidance in 2024 recommending to Member States improvements on independent living and community inclusion, to promote approaches that are in line with UNCRPD. This guidance will consider diverse perspectives, including children with disabilities, and will take a practical approach, exploring examples of promising practice from Member States’ experiences of using EU funds to support deinstitutionalisation processes and to develop the conditions for independent living.