There will be no resumption of negotiations on the appointment of the European Chief Prosecutor this week, according to several sources. After the sudden interruption of talks between the European Parliament and EU Council negotiators (see EUROPE 12229/15) on 4 April, no new date has been set.
Asked by EUROPE on Monday, 8 April, Judith Sargentini (Greens/EFA, the Netherlands), one of the three negotiators for the Parliament, reflected on this episode.
“Last week, the political situation has changed”, she insisted, referring to the indictment on 28 March in Bucharest of Laura Codruţa Kövesi, the former head of the Romanian Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office and the Parliament’s favourite candidate, on charges of corruption (see EUROPE 12225/7), as well as the decision, a few days later, of the Romanian High Court of Justice to lift the strict judicial control to which she was subject to.
New developments that had thrown fuel on the fire in the context of deep criticism of the Romanian Social Democratic government's judicial practices.
“We said this political situation changes everything and that we cannot ignore that in the debate. It would be giving in to the Romanian government’s blackmail! We asked the Council to reflect on that”, said Ms Sargentini.
But the trio of Finnish, Croatian and Portuguese ambassadors responsible for negotiating on behalf of the EU Council reportedly refused, arguing that they had no other mandate than to support the French candidate, Jean-François Bohnert.
“So, after one hour, we said 'enough' [...] We said that the European Parliament can never agree, in this situation, to change its candidate”, explained Ms Sargentini.
The Parliament’s negotiators are said to have suggested appointing Mrs Kövesi as European Chief Prosecutor and Mr Bohnert as deputy. No response to this proposal has been received from the EU Council at this stage.
A European source confirmed on Monday the status quo. The situation was reportedly presented to the Member States' ambassadors to the European Union (Coreper) on Friday, 5 April, but there was “no comment”.
The regulation establishing the European Public Prosecutor's Office stipulates that the EU Chief Prosecutor’s two deputies must be appointed by the College of European Public Prosecutors from among its members, this source recalled.
For the EU Council, this suggestion therefore raises legal problems, but also interferes in the selection process, since it would force France to include Mr Bohnert on the list of the three candidates it will propose for the post of EU Prosecutor.
For Ms Sargentini, the legal argument does not hold, since it is now a question of politics. “We cannot allow the Romanian government to take in hostage the process”, she said.
Hopes for a new round of negotiations before the European elections are now more than slim. The Parliament has yet to formally respond to the letter from the trio of ambassadors proposing a meeting on 12 April. “We feel that if the Council has not done its homework, then another meeting would not be useful”, Ms Sargentini claimed.
If negotiations do not resume until after the European elections, it means that the Parliament’s negotiating team will have to be changed. For Judith Sargentini, it doesn't matter who negotiates. “It’s better to do it right than speedily”, she said.
What are the next steps? It is probably too early to say. Ms Sargentini considered that holding a debate at ministerial level on the selection process for the European Chief Prosecutor could already be a step in the right direction.
“At the Council, it was discussed at Coreper level, not at ministerial level, and we think that now it is time to have a proper debate at the right place”, she explained. For her, the decision at Coreper can be seen as “technocratic” and “this is far from being a technocratic subject”.
Sweden's recent announcement of its wish to participate in the enhanced cooperation establishing the European Public Prosecutor's Office (see EUROPE 12228/2) would, in her view, provide a “diplomatic argument” for organising this debate.
“Maybe the Member States are too afraid because Romania is holding the Council Presidency. Maybe everything will change under the next Presidency”, she suggested.
On Tuesday, 9 April, a source from the European Commission expressed the same opinion. “It is probably easier for a Finnish Presidency to take this up again”, the source said.
For this Commission official, it is impossible in the current context to try to “reason” both parties. Nevertheless, the ambition is still to have an agreement under the current mandate of the European Commission, the official assured, so that the European Public Prosecutor's Office can be in place, as planned, in 2020. (Original version in French by Marion Fontana)