Ombudswoman asks EU institutions for more transparency amid complaints
The new European Ombudswoman has called on EU institutions to take a more proactive approach to improving transparency, following a rise in complaints about the issue.
Teresa Anjinho, who began her mandate in February at the body responsible for holding the bloc's institutions and agencies to account, told Euronews that change was needed.
"More can be done, especially at the European Commission, because there are successive delays in the delivery of documents," Anjinho said. "Access to information, which is often delayed, is then denied."
According to the Ombudswoman's latest annual report, the bloc's lack of transparency is the biggest concern for EU citizens.
"You can see that we had one of the biggest increases in complaints in the area of transparency. 42.2% of complaints are in the area of transparency, essentially access to documents," Anjinho explained.
Anjinho stressed that she stood with citizens in her role as the head of the Ombudswoman's Office.
"We are not mere administrative watchdogs. We are and must be a guardian of European citizenship and the citizen's right to participate," she said.
Anjinho also noted that "the Ombudswoman's Office is an independent institution that acts as a bridge between citizens and the institutions; we are in the middle and what we serve is good European administration".
"Any institution, be it (European) Parliament, the Commission or the Council, if it understands this, will always realise that it has an ally in the Ombudswoman's Office in terms of good administration. The fact that we criticise does not have to harm institutional relations," she added.
Under her predecessor, the Ombudswoman's Office was involved in complaints against European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen regarding messages at the heart of the so-called "Pfizergate" scandal, linked to the purchase of vaccines during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Anjinho is now launching her own inquiry into the issue of "revolving doors".
It will examine whether former public officials who transition into lobbying or private sector roles may benefit from their previous positions, potentially creating a conflict of interest between public service and private gain.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
France 24
43 minutes ago
- France 24
Hungary's Pride march ban a 'serious breach' of EU values: Sweden's EU minister
On the main thrust of the EU and NATO summits, Rosencrantz says: "It's been a historic week. Leaders have agreed on a very ambitious 5 percent (of GDP spending on defence) target at the NATO summit and at the European Council. Sweden has full focus on this, and we have an eight-party agreement, so all the parties in the Swedish parliament agree to reach this target." Rosencrantz elaborates: "In Sweden, we say that the support to Ukraine is our most important foreign policy priority. And we can also see now that Europe has actually surpassed the US when it comes to military support to Ukraine. We have a crucial role to play and we really have to maintain our focus, but not just by talking, but also by delivering concrete support. And that is something that the Nordic and Baltic countries are taking a lead in." While talks on the latest potential round of sanctions stalled at the EU summit, Rosencrantz stresses that "Sweden has been pushing for the 18th sanctions package. We think it's really important to put further pressure on Russia alongside our direct support to Ukraine. Different countries have different views, but so far we have managed to agree on the previous 17 sanctions packages. So I have good faith." Turning to the Hungarian governments controversial ban on the June 28 Pride march, Rosencrantz opines: "To me, it's really important to say that the EU is not just a geographical union. We're a union based on values. And as a member state, you have signed up to respecting fundamental values such as rule of law, anti-corruption, independent judiciary and for allowing people to be who they are and love who they are. So implementing legislation in Hungary, that basically means forbidding Pride parades, but also actually means imposing restrictions on people's possibility to meet or to express their opinions – that's a serious breach. So I think it's important to use all the tools in the toolbox." Asked what concrete action could follow, she replies: "You know, we have different tools. One thing is, going into the upcoming negotiations on the [EU] budget, not a single euro should go to a country that does not respect rule of law or our basic common principles, and that's something that Sweden will be really pushing for in this multiannual framework. The second is to intervene, legally, in different court processes in the European Court of Justice. Right now, Sweden is intervening in many cases, including on the LGBT law. And also last but not least, we have Article Seven, which is sort of the ultimate tool in the toolbox. I think we should be prepared there to take the next step in discussing what we can do." We also discuss the Middle East, and what leverage – if any – the EU has when it comes to Gaza. "The situation in Gaza is terrible. We are always standing up for Israel 's right to defend itself against Hamas. But the way that Israel is conducting its warfare at the moment is unacceptable," Rosencrantz states, adding: "Sweden is actually the second-largest donor of humanitarian support to Gaza in the EU. And this humanitarian aid does not reach the people that need it. So we need to put pressure on Israel to make sure that humanitarian aid gets into Gaza. We have welcomed the review of the [Israel-EU] Association Agreement. And there are clear indications that Israel is not living up to all the standards that it should. What we want as a next step is to have clear recommendations on how we can take this process further. We're also pushing for sanctions against some of the ministers in the Israeli government who are not seeking a two-state solution and are hindering the way forward."
Euronews
an hour ago
- Euronews
Greek government officials resign over EU farming subsidy fraud claims
Five high-ranking Greek government officials, including a minister and three deputies, resigned on Friday following allegations of involvement in corruption over the mismanagement of European Union farming subsidies. The case stems from the alleged mismanagement of EU subsidies for agriculture between 2019 and 2022 by a government agency, known by its Greek acronym OPEKEPE, tasked with handling the funds. According to the European Public Prosecutor's Office, a "significant number of individuals" received subsidies through the agency based on false declarations, including claims of owning or leasing pastures that were in fact public land. The suspects continued submitting false declarations of livestock until 2024, maintaining subsidy payment entitlement, it added. The prosecutor's office sent a hefty case file to Greece's parliament earlier this week including allegations of the possible involvement of government ministers in an organised fraud scheme. Members of parliament enjoy immunity from prosecution in Greece that can only be lifted by parliamentary vote. In a resignation letter to the prime minister on Friday, Migration and Asylum Minister Makis Voridis maintained his innocence, saying he was stepping down in order to concentrate on clearing his name. Voridis served as agriculture minister from mid-2019 to early 2021. Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis accepted his resignation, as well as those of the deputy ministers of foreign affairs, agriculture and food, and digital governance, and of the general secretary of agriculture and food. Replacements for all five will be named "in the coming days," government spokesman Pavlos Marinakis said in a statement. The European Commission announced earlier this month it would reduce the amount of farm subsidies for Greece by 5%, for a total of €392 million.
France 24
an hour ago
- France 24
Did Iran's enriched uranium stockpile survive the US-Israeli strikes?
In the wake of the US dropping 14 so-called 'bunker buster' bombs on nuclear production sites in Iran on Monday, questions remain over how successfully the operation achieved its aims of destroying Iran's nuclear programme. US President Donald Trump said the strikes "obliterated' Tehran's major nuclear sites in Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan, with Israel claiming the strikes set back Iran's nuclear programme by 'many years'. But a preliminary US intelligence report leaked on Tuesday said the strikes did significant damage, rather than causing complete destruction, echoing a statement from the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) describing 'extensive damage' at multiple sites in Iran. As Iranian lawmakers voted on Wednesday to suspend all cooperation with the IAEA, the nuclear watchdog has not been able to carry out any inspections since the strikes. There remains an unanswered question over whether the attacks destroyed Tehran's 408.6 kilo reserve of enriched uranium – an essential component if it plans to produce nuclear weapons. 408.6 kilos of enriched uranium Iran's uranium stockpile is enriched to 60 percent purity, putting it well within reach of the 90 percent purity required for use in nuclear weapons. 'Going from natural uranium to 60 percent takes considerable time and effort,' says Ludovica Castelli, specialist in nuclear development in the Middle East at Italian thinktank, Istituto Affari Internazionali (IAI). 'But once you're at 60 percent, the final step to 90 percent is much quicker. Experts estimate it could take just five or six days to enrich enough material for one nuclear weapon, if that political decision were made.' Before the war, experts believe the stockpile was mainly stored in two places: underground tunnels at a facility in Isfahan, and in a heavily fortified underground enrichment site in Fordow. Destroying these reserves would constitute a huge set back to Iran's nuclear ambitions. But while satellite images have shown destruction above ground, the two facilities are 'heavily fortified, and despite multiple Israeli and US attacks, there's no indication that those tunnels or the material inside were targeted,' Castelli says. There is also the possibility that Iran protected its stockpile by moving reserves to hidden storage sites prior to the attacks, as threatened by Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi. Initial US and European intelligence suggests this is likely to have happened. 'That raises serious concerns, because if the material is now stored across undisclosed sites, it becomes extremely difficult to monitor, let alone verify, under international safeguards,' Castelli says. Satellite imagery shows trucks and bulldozers at the Fordow site beginning June 19, three days before the US struck, which may have been used to move the uranium – or not. Subsequent satellite imagery 'revealed that the tunnel entrances into the underground complex had been sealed off with dirt prior to the US airstrikes,' Stephen Wood, senior director at American satellite imagery and analysis firm Maxar Technologies told AP. 'We believe that some of the trucks seen on 19 June were carrying dirt to be used as part of that operation.' 08:05 Nine nuclear bombs Iran's supplies of enriched uranium could be converted into enough weapons-grade uranium to make about nine nuclear bombs at a site like Fordow, Castelli says. However, the uranium 'is not going to enrich itself, and Natanz and Fordow are really badly damaged,' cautions Hans-Jakob Schindler, a former German diplomat in Tehran who today directs the Counter Extremism Project NGO. The centrifuges used to enrich uranium at Fordow are 'no longer operational,' the IAEA director Rafael Grossi told Radio France Internationale on Thursday. But it seems likely that Iran still has enrichment capacity at other sites including what Castelli describes as a 'significant underground complex' close to Natanz that is thought to hold high-strength rotors for centrifuges. If large sections of Tehran's nuclear infrastructure survived the attacks, 'the big question is, if Iran did move some of its 60 percent enriched uranium, in what time frame are they going to be able to enrich that to 90 percent and then build a bomb?' asks Schindler. Before the start of the Israel-Iran conflict, experts estimated that it would take Iran three weeks to enrich its uranium to 90 percent and then produce nine nuclear weapons. But such estimates could be a best-case scenario for Tehran as material such as centrifuges are sensitive and must work in tandem to more quickly enrich uranium. 'They work in cascades so if one centrifuge fails, the entire cascade fails,' says Schindler. 'You can't bomb knowledge' Israeli officials said that on June 23 that its military carried out additional strikes around Fordow in order to damage access routes and prevent the Iranians from transporting materials needed to pursue their nuclear plans elsewhere. Although Israel and Iran have now agreed to a ceasefire, proposed by Trump, moving uranium out of hiding – if there is any – will not be an easy task. 'If it's in the form of uranium hexafluoride gas, which is what's used in centrifuges, it has to be stored in special high-pressure cylinders,' Castelli says. 'This gas is chemically toxic and highly reactive, particularly with water. If there's a leak during transport, there could be a chemical hazard.' The chemical is easier to handle when converted to solid form, such as a powder, but still requires steps to reduce contamination and exposure. Castelli says, 'moving it safely would require specialized equipment'. There is also the risk that such activity would be picked up by US or Israeli surveillance – meaning that Tehran may, for now, prefer to leave any hidden supplies where they are. The US, Israel and the IAEA all agree that strikes on Iran have set back its nuclear programme, but it remains unclear by how much. 'You just don't know how extensive the damage is. You could argue maybe it's several years', Schindler says. US intelligence has estimated Tehran's plans have been set back only a few months, although the White House rejected this assessment. Even then, the main damage is operational and Iran has the know-how to recoup what it has lost. As former US secretary of state Colin L. Powell once remarked, ' you can't bomb knowledge '. With time, financial investment and willpower, Tehran could rebuild infrastructure to pursue its nuclear programme, buoyed by its possible stash of enriched uranium. Despite 12 days of US and Israeli strikes on Iran, 'there are still engineers. There are more scientists than those that were killed", says Schindler. That is one of the most compelling arguments against the US-Israeli attacks, the expert says. Without significant political change and regional integration of Iran, Schindler says two outcomes are likely: 'The next person in power is going to build a nuclear bomb, and they're not going to do that with IAEA inspections. So, [the West] is going to have to attack Iran again, and they may not know as much about the nuclear programme as they did this time. They will be taking an ever-increasing risk.'
