You are in:
- Contents » European Democracy
The Secret State
What are they hiding?
The European Commission has come under fire for planning to limit access to policy documents - in some cases, denying that certain papers exist.
In what the Times describes as a "strongly worded attack", the European Ombudsman warned that the plans would break promises of openness and transparency due to citizens of EU member states.
The "Draft Convention on Access to Official Documents", drawn up by the Information Commissioner Margot Wallstrom, are designed to reclassify which documents will be subject to public scrutiny. Her office claims that the proposals will make the current system "less vague" by placing documents on a register; however, as the Ombudsman notes, many documents could be excluded from the register, which could even lead to denials that they even exist.
According to the Ombudsman's reading of the draft, a document wouldn't even be defined as such until it was classified and placed on the register. So, in other words, a member of the public or investigating journalist (such as there are in Brussels) might ask to see a certain document: Because it isn't on the official register, there is no such document. Yes, perhaps papers exist which might be useful, but we can't tell you that - there is no such document.
Kafkaesque? Certainly.
The Ombudsman claims Ms Wallstrom's plans are "a step backwards for transparency."
"I have been unable to identify any of the Commission’s proposals that would result in more documents being accessible than at present", he writes. He calls on the European Parliament, as "the only Institution of the Union to enjoy direct democratic legitimacy", to ensure that commitments to transparency are met. (The European Parliament's record on matters of transparency is not good: Earlier this year it voted to refuse the public access to an auditor's file on expenses abuse by MEPs).
What exactly does the EU need to classify documents for anyway? Laws protect those under legal investigation from having their papers released.
Is it so financial corruption can continue beyond public scrutiny? It is difficult to believe that an organisation - even one as stuffed to the gills with crooks and scam artists as the EU - would actually legislate a cover up at the Commission level. The Parliament's vote to keep its expenses claims under lock and key notwithstanding...
It all looks very sinister.
The EU doesn't have an army; it is not, as yet, a state with intelligence services and spies in other countries. It is not at war. Does Ms Wallstrom want to cover up work done by an embryonic EU intelligence service?
What about governments? Heads of government meet regularly to test one another's limits to the expansion of EU federal powers. Do governments fear that their negotiations will be uncovered? If so, good. The public has a right to know what their elected representatives are planning to surrender to their unelected bosses.
Eurocrats might scoff: But until all EU papers are made available to the public on demand, the public has a right to speculate that their unelected leaders are doing their worst.
