Dear Sir/Madam,

In the wake of the European Parliament's corruption scandal, it has never been more important for EU bodies and EU officials to act with openness and transparency. Beyond the urgent need to repair the damage which has been done to the EU's credibility and moral standing, transparency is indeed required by and enshrined in both primary EU law and secondary EU legislation. The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, Article 42, states that:

"Any citizen of the Union, and any natural or legal person residing or having its registered office in a Member State, has a right of access to documents of the institutions, bodies, offices and agencies of the Union, whatever their medium."

The Treaty on European Union, Article 11, states that:

"The institutions shall maintain an open, transparent and regular dialogue with representative associations and civil society."

The Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Article 15, states that:

"In order to promote good governance and ensure the participation of civil society, the Union's institutions, bodies, offices and agencies shall conduct their work as openly as possible... Any citizen of the Union, and any natural or legal person residing or having its registered office in a Member State, shall have a right of access to documents of the Union's institutions, bodies, offices and agencies..."

EU Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, which concerns public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents, states that:

"Openness enables citizens to participate more closely in the decision-making process and guarantees that the administration enjoys greater legitimacy and is more effective and more accountable to the citizen in a democratic system."

When it comes to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents, access is the rule, and secrecy is the exception. Exceptions must be applied strictly, and interpreted narrowly. And once again, transparency in EU activities has never been more important than it is right now.

On 1 October 2021 I received by email a letter from the European Commission Directorate-General for Health and Food Safety, with identifier: Ref. Ares(2021)5983971 - 01/10/2021. In the letter, the EU official who was writing to me stated the following:

"Regarding the third question, an amendment of the grant for the coordination of ERN-Cranio under the 3rd Health Programme was accepted in 2020 by the Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency (CHAFEA) for the transfer of 50.000 € from the international meetings budget, saved due to the COVID-19 restrictions, to subcontracting budget for launching the ERN Clinical Practice Guideline for Pierre Robin Sequence in line with the justifications provided by the beneficiary."

I respectfully request a copy of the European Commission documents which as described in the paragraph above amend the grant for the coordination of ERN-Cranio under the 3rd Health Programme for the transfer of 50.000 € from the international meetings budget to subcontracting budget for launching the ERN Clinical Practice Guideline for Pierre Robin Sequence.

EU Regulation 1049 Article 4(1)(b) indicates that an EU institution in possession of an EU document may limit access to that document if full disclosure would undermine the protection of:

"privacy and the integrity of the individual, in particular in accordance with Community legislation regarding the protection of personal data."

However, EU Regulation 1049 Article 4(6) goes on to state that:

"If only parts of the requested document are covered by any of the exceptions, the remaining parts of the document shall be released."

If the European Commission deems it necessary for the purpose of protecting personal data to black out or otherwise delete personal data in the requested documents, then this would be acceptable, on the condition that the European Commission clearly marks where the editing took place, and justifies in detail why the editing was necessary. Please note that Regulation 1049's exception to protect personal data does not apply to public officials when they are acting in an official capacity; therefore please refrain from editing, in the requested documents, any personal data associated with European Commission officials.

I ask that these documents be sent to me in machine-readable electronic format. Thank you.

Kind regards,

Philippe Pakter
Chairman, Pierre Robin Europe

Dear Directorate-General for Health and Food Safety,

Postal address:

Stichting Pierre Robin Europe - Philippe Pakter
51 Gerard Terborgstraat
Att. Nies
1071 TL Amsterdam
The Netherlands

Thank you.

Kind regards,

Philippe Pakter

Dear [email address],

I am writing this letter to remind you of the following. In the wake of the European Parliament's corruption scandal, it has never been more important for EU bodies and EU officials to act with openness and transparency. Beyond the urgent need to repair the damage which has been done to the EU's credibility and moral standing by the corruption scandal, transparency is indeed required by and enshrined in both primary EU law and secondary EU legislation. The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, Article 42, states that: "Any citizen of the Union, and any natural or legal person residing or having its registered office in a Member State, has a right of access to documents of the institutions, bodies, offices and agencies of the Union, whatever their medium." The Treaty on European Union, Article 11, states that: "The institutions shall maintain an open, transparent and regular dialogue with representative associations and civil society." The Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Article 15, states that: "In order to promote good governance and ensure the participation of civil society, the Union's institutions, bodies, offices and agencies shall conduct their work as openly as possible... Any citizen of the Union, and any natural or legal person residing or having its registered office in a Member State, shall have a right of access to documents of the Union's institutions, bodies, offices and agencies..." EU Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, which concerns public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents, states that: "Openness enables citizens to participate more closely in the decision-making process and guarantees that the administration enjoys greater legitimacy and is more effective and more accountable to the citizen in a democratic system."

When it comes to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents, access is the rule, and secrecy is the exception. Exceptions must be applied strictly, and interpreted narrowly. And once again, transparency in EU activities has never been more important than it is right now.

I submitted this request for European Commission documents on 16 December 2022. Today is 14 February 2023; 60 days have passed. I still have not received the requested documents.

There is nothing confidential about these documents I have requested; no sensitive national security interests are involved. These are standard, run-of-the-mill European Commission documents. As noted in my 16 December 2022 request, EU Regulation 1049 Article 4(1)(b) permits an EU institution in possession of an EU document to limit access to that document if full disclosure would undermine the protection of: "privacy and the integrity of the individual, in particular in accordance with Community legislation regarding the protection of personal data." However, EU Regulation 1049 Article 4(6) also states that: "If only parts of the requested document are covered by any of the exceptions, the remaining parts of the document shall be released."

European Commission DG SANTE, please focus on those words: "the remaining parts of the document shall be released."

On 16 December 2022 I agreed in advance that if the European Commission DG SANTE deems it necessary for the purpose of protecting personal data to black out or otherwise delete personal data in the requested documents, then this would be acceptable, on the condition that the European Commission clearly marks where the editing took place, and justifies in detail why the editing was necessary. I noted that Regulation 1049's exception to protect personal data does not apply to public officials when they are acting in an official capacity. Therefore I asked you to please refrain from editing, in the requested documents, any personal data associated with European Commission officials.

As the European Commission declared in its official statement, 2017/C 18/02, "The European Union is founded on the rule of law and relies on law to ensure that its policies and priorities are realised in the Member States. The effective application, implementation and enforcement of the law is a responsibility entrusted to the Commission by Article 17(1) of the Treaty on European Union." Never mind the European Commission's responsibility under Article 17(1) of the Treaty on European Union to enforce EU law - in this instance, the European Commission is not even respecting EU law, in the clandestine way it is conducting its own activities. This improper delay is both embarrassing and shameful. It should not take this long for the European Commission to fulfill its legal obligation to maintain openness and transparency as required by EU Regulation No 1049/2001.

European Commission DG SANTE, in the name of openness, honesty, transparency, public access, good governance, accountability, and EU legitimacy - and as legally required by EU Regulation No 1049/2001 - please provide these non-confidential European Commission documents which I requested 60 days ago on 16 December 2022. Thank you.

Sincerely,

Philippe Pakter
Chairman, Pierre Robin Europe