The European Union’s general court has ruled against the European Commission for refusing to disclose text messages exchanged between Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla during the height of COVID-19 vaccine negotiations.
The case, brought by The New York Times, centered on the Commission’s refusal to provide access to text messages that von der Leyen reportedly exchanged with Bourla while the EU was urgently securing vaccine doses in early 2021. The Commission claimed it was unable to locate the messages, prompting criticism from transparency advocates and journalists.
In a strongly worded decision issued Wednesday, the court rejected that defense, stating the Commission “has not given a plausible explanation to justify the non-possession of the requested documents.” The ruling directly challenges the Commission’s handling of transparency obligations and could have far-reaching implications for the public’s right to access digital communications in official negotiations.
The court emphasized that the Commission had failed to conduct a proper search for the texts and had offered no convincing rationale for their absence. This, the judges noted, undermines democratic accountability, especially when decisions of vast public interest and financial consequence are involved.
Although the ruling can be appealed, it sets an important precedent for expanding democratic oversight of digital communications by top officials. Under current EU regulations, access to official documents is protected as a fundamental right, but applying these rules to text messages and informal channels remains a legal gray area.
The case has drawn attention across the bloc, as the negotiations in question led to one of the EU’s largest vaccine contracts, reportedly worth billions of euros. Critics have long argued that the opaque nature of the talks, and von der Leyen’s unusually direct role in them, sidestepped the EU’s typical procurement and oversight protocols.
Legal experts say the decision could lead to more rigorous transparency requirements for EU institutions, particularly concerning informal or personal communication channels such as SMS, messaging apps, and encrypted services.
For journalists, advocates, and watchdogs, the court’s decision represents a rare victory in the ongoing battle for greater institutional openness in the EU.
