On Thursday 17 May, the European Ombudsman, Emily O’Reilly, carried out the annual stock-take of her bureau and explained her decision to send the European Parliament a special report on the opacity of the work of the Council.
After a year’s investigation, O’Reilly notified the Council of her recommendations on 9 February 2018, stressing that its functioning was not at the level of expectations in terms of transparency and legislating (see EUROPE 11960). The Council, which had until 9 May to react, remained silent.
In her special report to Parliament, O’Reilly asks for the positions of the member states during the meetings of preparatory working groups and ambassadors (Coreper) be made public. Putting more information into the public domain would help to discourage national ministers from putting the blame on Brussels, she argues.
O’Reilly also flags up the difference in accountability between the Council and the Parliament concerning the transparency of their work. Disappointed at the lack of reaction to her recommendations, she hopes to put pressure on the Council on a politically sensitive matter.
“Change of culture”
O’Reilly nonetheless highlighted the excellent cooperation between the European institutions and her office, with the exception of this particular case. For instance, she highlighted the progress made by the Commission and the European Central Bank (ECB) towards greater transparency, which she described as a true change of administrative culture.
On 14 May, O'Reilly, an Irish national, launched an investigation into the appointment of Martin Selmayr to the post of Secretary General of the Commission (see EUROPE 12019). “Although some feel that the procedure was respected, we need to take account of the controversy surrounding the affair”, she said.
As regards Brexit, O’Reilly stressed that the implementation of the British withdrawal would lead to an explosion in the number of cases and that her office was ready to react when the time comes.
So far, ten complaints concerning Brexit have been brought before the Ombudsman, two of which are still ongoing.
Positive results
O’Reilly’s assessment of the office of Ombudsman’s actions in 2017 was positive, based in particular on the increase in the number of complaints submitted. She said that this rise is a symptom of the increased visibility of the Ombudsman, which was one of the aims she set herself when she took up her duties.
She also welcomed the impact of her recommendations in areas such as the transparency of the Commission’s expert groups and the rules on conflicts of interests for special advisers.
O’Reilly said that she would seek a further term to build on the foundations she has laid and increase the size of the importance of the body she heads up.
The Ombudsman is elected by the parliamentarians for a term of five years, following the European elections. (Original version in French by Mathieu Solal, intern)