Introduction
The European Union’s highest court has ruled that the European Commission was wrong to withhold text messages between its president, Ursula von der Leyen, and Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla. These messages—sent during critical Covid-19 vaccine negotiations—remain undisclosed, sparking a scandal widely dubbed “Pfizergate.” The court’s judgment is a watershed moment for transparency in EU institutions, as watchdogs and journalists demand answers over one of the most expensive vaccine deals in EU history.
1. The Court Slammed the Commission’s Lack of Transparency
The General Court of the EU concluded that the Commission offered “no plausible explanation” for refusing to release the texts. It criticized the executive body for relying on assumptions and vague information when responding to journalist requests under Freedom of Information laws.
2. Von der Leyen’s Private Negotiations With Pfizer Raised Eyebrows
In 2021, the New York Times reported that von der Leyen had directly negotiated with Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla through private text exchanges. This sidestepped the usual collective procurement processes used by the EU, raising major accountability concerns.
3. Investigative Journalists Led the Legal Charge
German journalist Alexander Fanta and NYT correspondent Matina Stevis pursued the release of the texts via formal requests and court action. Their efforts culminated in Wednesday’s landmark ruling, hailed as a victory for press freedom and democratic oversight.
4. The Commission Claimed It Didn’t “Have” the Messages
The Commission argued that the texts were not stored as official documents, exploiting a legal grey area. Under EU rules, communications relevant to policy decisions must be archived—but SMS messages are not systematically classified this way.
5. Ombudsman Had Already Found “Maladministration”
In 2021, the European Ombudsman criticized the Commission for failing to even search for the texts, calling it maladministration. Yet the Commission stood firm, prompting the legal escalation that led to this week’s judgment.
6. Questions Linger Over Message Deletion
The court said the Commission failed to clarify whether the messages were deleted or if von der Leyen changed phones. If they were deleted, it remains unknown whether that was deliberate—potentially worsening public mistrust.
7. Transparency Advocates Hail the Verdict
Transparency International called the ruling a “landmark victory,” urging the EU to end its restrictive stance on public access to high-level communications. The case has energized civil society groups demanding stricter archiving rules and oversight for senior officials.
Conclusion
The Pfizergate ruling exposes deep flaws in the EU’s transparency and accountability mechanisms, especially during crisis decision-making. As calls grow for reform, this case may mark a turning point in how digital communications are handled within EU institutions. Whether the actual content of the Pfizer texts will ever be disclosed remains uncertain, but the pressure on the Commission—and on von der Leyen herself—continues to mount.
Read More: EU Covid Vaccine Procurement Controversy
External Source: BBC Coverage on EU Court Pfizergate Ruling
