Luxembourg, 26/02/2002 (Agence Europe) - Members of the European Parliament cannot obtain annulment of the decision of the European Parliament making them subject to the investigatory power of the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF), ruled the Court of First Instance in its judgement in the case brought by Willi Rothley and others against the European Parliament. The Court rules that since the MEPs are not "individually" concerned by the contested measure, the action is dismissed as inadmissible.
The press release states: "the contested measure has a general purpose, which is to lay down the conditions upon which the Parliament will cooperate with the Office (OLAF) in order to facilitate the smooth operation of investigations within that institution. In keeping with that object, the measure contemplates the situation of the Members and stipulates special provisions for them where, in particular, they are implicated in an investigation conducted by the Office or where they have acquired knowledge of facts which give rise to a presumption of the existence of possible cases of fraud or of serious situations relating to the discharge of professional duties which may constitute a failure to comply with obligations liable to result in disciplinary or, where appropriate, criminal proceedings. The contested measure applies without distinction to the Members of the Parliament in office at the time of its entry into force and to any other person subsequently coming to perform the same duties. The Court finds that it applies without temporal limitation to objectively determined situations and has legal effects with respect to categories of persons envisaged in the abstract. The Court concludes that the contested measure, although it is called a "decision", it a measures of general application".
"The Court states that the risk cannot a priori be excluded that the Office, in conducting an investigation, might perform an act prejudicial to the immunity enjoyed by every Member of the Parliament. However, even if such an event were to occur, any Member of the Parliament confronted with an act of that nature, which he considered damaging to him, could then avail himself of the judicial protection and the legal remedies provided for by the Treaty".
The Court points out that on 28 April 1999 the Commission adopted the decision establishing the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) and on 25 May 1999, the European Parliament and the Council adopted a regulation concerning investigations carried out by OLAF and providing inter alia that OLAF may carry out investigations within the European Institutions, the latter being informed when OLAF agents conduct an investigation on their premises or when they consult a document or request information held by those institutions. An interinstitutional agreement between Parliament, Council and the Commission provides that each institution is to adopt common rules consisting of the implementing measures required to ensure the smooth operation of the investigations carried out by OLAF within their institution. On 18 November 1999 the Parliament adopted a decision on the amendments to its Rules of Procedure authorising application of the rules provided for by the interinstitutional agreement. Willi Rothley and 70 other Members of the European Parliament challenged the legality of that decision, wanting the Court of First Instance to annul it.