Dear Madam, Sir,

Under the right of access to documents in the EU treaties, as developed in Regulation 1049/2001, I am requesting documents which contain the following information:

- the note dated 21 June 2018 from the Secretary-General, entitled ‘Implementation of the updated Roadmap for the adaptation of preventive and early support measures to deal with conflict and harassment between Members and APAs or other staff’ (PE 622.990/BUR and annexes);

- the letter dated 22 June 2018 from Mr MAŇKA, Quaestor, concerning the draft Code of Appropriate Behaviour for Members of the European Parliament in exercising their duties (PE 624.918/BUR);

- the letter dated 28 June 2018 from Ms MORIN-CHARTIER, Quaestor and Chair of the Advisory Committee on Harassment, concerning the revision of the rules for the functioning of the Advisory Committee, the draft Code of Appropriate Behaviour for Members of the European Parliament in exercising their duties and the proposal to insert a new article in the Implementing Measures for the Statute for the Members of the European Parliament (PE 624.919/BUR);

- the note dated 28 February 2018 from the Secretary-General entitled ‘Updated roadmap for the adaptation of preventive and early support measures to deal with conflict and harassment between Members and APAs, trainees or other staff’ (PE 615.753/BUR/REV2 and annex);

All the best,
Peter Teffer

postal address:
EUobserver
Rue Montoyer 18B
1000 Brussels
Belgium

PS: When sending physical mail, please include the word 'EUobserver' on the envelope

Dear Madam, Sir,

Please pass this on to the person who reviews confirmatory applications.

I am filing the following confirmatory application with regards to my access to documents request which was registered on 13/09/2018 under reference A(2018)12698.

I thank the European Parliament for its release of the two letters which I requested, however I would like to point out that the letter from MEP Morin-Chartier refers to three annexes:
I: Draft decision on the functioning of the Advisory Committee dealing with harassment complaints concerning Members of the European Parliament and its procedures for dealing with complaints
II: Draft Code of Appropriate Behaviour for Members of the European Parliament in Exercising Their Duties
III: Proposal to incorporate a new article into the IMSM to provide a legal basis for charging to the parliamentary assistance budget of the Member concerned the cost of a harassment case validated by the Legal Service

These annexes were not enclosed in Parliament's reply, perhaps in error. Please send those annexes, as they are integral part of the letter disclosed. Parliament has not given any reason why those annexes should be treated differently than the letters.

I also would like to appeal the decision not to disclose:

- the note dated 21 June 2018 from the Secretary-General, entitled ‘Implementation of the updated Roadmap for the adaptation of preventive and early support measures to deal with conflict and harassment between Members and APAs or other staff’ (PE 622.990/BUR and annexes);
- the note dated 28 February 2018 from the Secretary-General entitled ‘Updated roadmap for the adaptation of preventive and early support measures to deal with conflict and harassment between Members and APAs, trainees or other staff’ (PE 615.753/BUR/REV2 and annex);

First and foremost, there is a conflict of interest. Regardless of secretary general Klaus Welle's intentions and professionalism, it is simply not possible for the secretary general of the European Parliament to take an objective decision about whether to allow access to notes written by the secretary general of the European Parliament.

On top of that, I take issue with the premise of the secretary general's decision not to disclose the documents.

“Parliament considers that for the secretary general to be in a position to fulfil his duty to assist the Bureau in the performance of its tasks by providing it with background information, advice and decision proposals, such reports to the Bureau shall remain confidential,” he wrote.

It is unclear to which entity Mr Welle is referring here when he says “Parliament”, but it surely is not a majority of MEPs.

On 28 April 2016 the European Parliament adopted a resolution, in which it called on the Parliament "to make available the agendas and feedback notes of the meetings of committee coordinators, the Bureau and the Conference of Presidents, as well as, in principle, all documents referred to in these agendas ... by publishing them on the parliament's website". The text received the support from an 86 percent majority (523 yes votes, 37 no votes, and 46 abstentions).

On 14 September 2017, the European Parliament adopted another resolution (368 yes votes, 161 no votes, and 60 abstentions). In the resolution, the parliament recalled “its calls on the Commission and the Council in its resolution of 28 April 2016 on public access to documents for the years 2014-2015 , in which it: … called for agendas and feedback notes of the meetings of Parliament’s Committee Coordinators, Bureau and Conference of Presidents to be made available, and, in principle, for all documents referred to in those agendas to be made available too, by publishing them on Parliament’s website”.

The notes which I requested, were mentioned in the Bureau agenda. Logic dictates that a majority of MEPs believe that they should “in principle” be published.

Additionally, even if the exception on the basis of Article 4(3) is accepted, there is an overriding public interest in the documents' disclosure.

The European Parliament said in its Thursday, 26 October 2017 resolution 'Combating sexual harassment and abuse in the EU' that “cases of sexual harassment and bullying are significantly underreported to the authorities due to a fairly persistent low social awareness of the issue, insufficient channels for victim support and the perception that it is a sensitive issue for society, despite the existence of formal procedures to tackle it in the workplace and in other spheres”; that “sexual harassment and abuse, predominantly by men against women, is a structural and widespread problem throughout Europe and the world, and is a phenomenon that involves victims and perpetrators of all ages, educational backgrounds, incomes and social positions, and that is linked to the unequal distribution of power between women and men in our society”; and most importantly that “politicians, as elected representatives of citizens, have a crucial responsibility to act as positive role models in preventing and combating sexual harassment in society”.

In resolution point 17, the plenary calls on the president of the parliament and parliament's administration to take a number of measures. The plenary also calls “on all politicians to act as responsible role models in preventing and combating sexual harassment in parliaments and beyond”.

It therefore is in the public interest that the progress made towards implementing the resolution, because MEPs “have a crucial responsibility to act as positive role models in preventing and combating sexual harassment in society”. Being able to independently assess what measures have been taken to prevent and combat sexual harassment in the European Parliament is crucial for citizens to see MEPs as role models in this regard.

All the best,
Peter Teffer
postal address:
EUobserver
Rue Montoyer 18B
1000 Brussels
Belgium
PS: When sending physical mail, please include the word 'EUobserver' on the envelope

A full history of my request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.asktheeu.org/en/request/road...

Dear Madam, Sir,

It is now over two weeks ago (29 October 2018) that I sent a confirmatory application with regards to my access to documents request which was registered on 13/09/2018 under reference A(2018)12698.

I have not yet received an acknowledgement that my confirmatory application is being handled.

A full history of my request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.asktheeu.org/en/request/road...

Sincerely,
Peter Teffer