The General Court of the European Union ruled on Wednesday 12 March (case T-349/23) that the European Parliament’s internal procedure that led to Monica Semedo being sanctioned for psychological harassment did not respect her rights of defence.
Ms Semedo sought the annulment of the decisions of the President of the European Parliament in April 2023, according to which certain conduct by the interested party constituted psychological harassment of a former parliamentary assistant and was liable to result in the loss of her right to the subsistence allowance for ten days (see EUROPE 13164/22).
In its judgment, the General Court annulled the decisions of the President of the European Parliament, finding that they were affected by irregularities that had an impact on Ms Semedo’s rights of defence.
The European Court found that the non-confidential version of the Parliamentary Advisory Committee’s report of November 2022 contained a summary of witness statements that did not reflect the substance of the testimony given during the internal investigation. In addition, Ms Semedo was not given the opportunity to find out exactly what was in the file on which the charges against her were based. Not all the written evidence was provided by the committee or the President of the European Parliament.
The General Court concluded that this failure to communicate the documents in the file on which the Parliament’s administration relied inevitably affects the legality of its decisions, in terms of the protection of the rights of the defence.
To see the General Court’s judgment, go to https://aeur.eu/f/fw8 (Original version in French by Mathieu Bion)