MEPs once again, during the plenary session on 19 May, found Andrej Babiš to be in a conflict of interest and called for the repayment of EU funds received by Czech companies still controlled by the Czech Prime Minister, such as Agrofert (see EUROPE 12613/43). The European Parliament will adopt a joint resolution on this subject in June (see EUROPE 12706/22).
EU Budget Commissioner Johannes Hahn was keen to reassure MEPs at the end of the debate. “The Commission has again taken decisive measures in the Czech conflict of interest case. The Union budget has been and remains fully protected. The Commission is also taking bold steps beyond the Czech case to ensure that conflicts of interest are avoided”.
He recalled that the Commission had recently published a final audit report for the European Regional Development Fund and the European Social Fund. “No expenditure was so far declared for any of the operations affected by this audit”, he said.
The procedure is still ongoing with regard to agricultural expenditure. When it comes to the audit of the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development, the procedure is still ongoing, the Commissioner said. The aim is to establish the financial consequences of the audit findings and to agree as far as possible on the corrective measures that need to be implemented.
“Reimbursements from the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development requested by the Czech authorities for the projects concerned were suspended”, Mr Hahn said.
However, the Czech authorities have challenged the Commission’s suspension decision before the General Court of the European Union and that procedure is following its own course.
“In the opinion of the Committee on Budgetary Control and the European Parliament, by a very, very large majority, it is absolutely inacceptable how widespread and entrenched oligarchic structures have developed in the Czech Republic”, said German MEP Monika Hohlmeier, speaking on behalf of the EPP group. She called for clear legal rules in the EU Council to ensure that those who own the largest companies cannot negotiate in the area of agriculture and cohesion.
Activate the ‘Rule of law’ mechanism. For Lara Wolters (S&D, Netherlands), it is now “well established” that Czech Prime Minister is able to “prop up his own businesses with public money, and in doing that, he undermines European values and he deceives European taxpayers”. She called on the Czech authorities to “retrieve the money received from Mr Babiš’ businesses”. The Commission should, in her view, “act as a guardian of the Rule of law and not be shy with the conditionality mechanism” linking the disbursement of EU funds to respect for the Rule of law.
Several MEPs also considered that he could resolve his conflict of interest either by stopping the funnelling of European subsidies to his companies or stepping down as a member of the European Council.
Joachim Kuhs (Identity and Democracy, Germany) denounced the misappropriation of EU funds and said that “the financial flows should be stopped and reimbursements should be increased by 20%”.
“The Czech Prime Minister is both the owner of a large chemical company and the Prime Minister who gives it subsidies”, protested Mikuláš Peksa (Greens/EFA, Czech Republic).
Zdzisław Krasnodębski (ECR, Poland) said that the Commission had acted too slowly in this case. The problem is systemic, he says.
For Ondřej Knotek, the European Parliament ignores the facts. Ondřej Knotek (Renew Europe, Czech Republic), speaking on behalf of his group, defended the actions implemented by the Babiš government. The MEPs from the Czech Prime Minister’s party in the European Parliament are members of this group.
“The Czech Republic is implementing the measures recommended in the audit report. It strengthens the mechanism for preventing conflicts of interest. And it has been clearly established that there is no risk to the EU budget”, Mr Knotek said. He criticised some MEPs for deliberately ignoring “this, shall we say, positive trend” for “obvious” political reasons. “What is the real point of such a future political resolution if it does not take into account the current state of affairs?”, he asked.
These statements are not binding on the entire Renew Europe group. Our group recognises that the Commission’s audit concluded that Mr Babiš had “breached the rules on conflicts of interest”, said its spokesperson, Hughes Beaudouin. “If (Mr Babiš) does not agree with the Commission’s findings, he can appeal through the appropriate legal channels”, he added.
The EU Council sends the ball back to the Commission’s court. “I am not in a position to give any EU Council opinion on specific cases of alleged fraud or corruption”, said the representative of the Portuguese Presidency of the EU Council, Augusto Santos Silva, Minister of Foreign Affairs. He said that the Commission was “responsible for the implementation of the budget and the recovery of unjustified payments, and it was the Commission that carried out an audit on this issue”. (Original version in French by Lionel Changeur)