Independent Ethical Committee opinions
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:
All Independent Ethical Committee opinions and advices that have not yet been published on the European Commission website, including but not limited to the 2015 advice regarding the intention by former European Commissioner Neelie Kroes to work for Uber.
The Independent Ethical Committee advises the Commission on whether planned activities of Commissioners after leaving office are compatible with the Treaties. The President may also seek the advice of the Independent Ethical Committee on any other ethical question relating to the Code of Conduct for the Members of the European Commission.
On the European Commission webpage titled "Former European Commissioners' authorised occupations" (1), opinions of the Independent Ethical Committee related to decisions of the European Commission are published. However, media reports published under the name Uber Files about a request from Mrs Kroes suggest that not all opinions of the Committee are published on this website. These media reports said: "In November 2015, Uber and Kroes received an opinion from the commission’s “ad hoc ethical committee” stating she should not work for the tech company before her 18-month cooling-off period ended in May 2016." No such opinion is published on the website.
The webpage seemingly only publishes authorised occupations, which means that the public does not have access to opinions which advice not to authorise occupations, or decisions where a requested occupation has been rejected. Since citizens should be in a position to determine if former European Commissioners have been told not to accept a requested occupation, it is in the public interest to publish those non-public opinions and advices too.
Please note I prefer to receive the documents in digital format, not by physical mail.
Sincerely,
Peter Teffer
Follow the Money
Overtoom 197
1054 HT Amsterdam
The Netherlands
Your message has been received by the Transparency Unit of the
Secretariat-General of the European Commission.
Requests for public access to documents are treated on the basis of
[1]Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to
European Parliament, Council and Commission documents.
The Secretariat-General will reply to your request within 15 working days
upon registration of your request and will duly inform you of the
registration of the request (or of any additional information to be
provided in view of its registration and/or treatment).
L’unité «Transparence» du secrétariat général de la Commission européenne
a bien reçu votre message.
Les demandes d’accès du public aux documents sont traitées sur la base du
[2]règlement (CE) n° 1049/2001 du 30 mai 2001 relatif à l’accès du public
aux documents du Parlement européen, du Conseil et de la Commission.
Le secrétariat général répondra à votre demande dans un délai de 15 jours
ouvrables à compter de la date d’enregistrement de votre demande, et vous
informera de cet enregistrement (ou vous indiquera toute information
supplémentaire à fournir en vue de l'enregistrement et/ou du traitement de
votre demande).
Ihre Nachricht ist beim Referat „Transparenz“ des Generalsekretariats der
Europäischen Kommission eingegangen.
Anträge auf Zugang zu Dokumenten werden auf der Grundlage der
[3]Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1049/2001 vom 30. Mai 2001 über den Zugang der
Öffentlichkeit zu Dokumenten des Europäischen Parlaments, des Rates und
der Kommission behandelt.
Das Generalsekretariat beantwortet Ihre Anfrage innerhalb von
15 Arbeitstagen nach deren Registrierung und wird Sie über die
Registrierung Ihres Antrags (oder die Notwendigkeit weiterer Informationen
im Hinblick auf dessen Registrierung und/oder Bearbeitung) unterrichten.
References
Visible links
1. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/...
2. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/...
3. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/...
Link: [1]File-List
Link: [2]Edit-Time-Data
Link: [3]themeData
Link: [4]colorSchemeMapping
Dear Sir,
Thank you for your e-mail of 11 July 2022. We hereby acknowledge receipt
of your application for access to documents, which was registered on 12
July 2022 under reference number GESTDEM 2022/3994.
In accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 regarding public access to
European Parliament, Council and Commission documents, your application
will be handled within 15 working days.
The time limit will expire on 3 August 2022. In case this time limit needs
to be extended, you will be informed in due course.
You have lodged your application via a private third-party website, which
has no link with any institution of the European Union.
Therefore, the European Commission cannot be held accountable for any
technical issues or problems linked to the use of this system.
Please note that the private third party running the AsktheEU.org website
is responsible and accountable for the processing of your personal data
via that website, and not the Commission.
For further information on your rights, please refer to the third party’s
privacy policy.
We understand that the third party running the AsktheEU.org website
usually publishes the content of applicants’ correspondence with the
Commission on that website. This includes the personal data that you may
have communicated to the Commission (e.g. your private postal address).
Similarly, the third party publishes on that website any reply that the
Commission will send to the email address of the applicants generated by
the AsktheEU.org website.
If you do not wish that your correspondence with the Commission is
published on a private third-party website such as AsktheEU.org, you can
provide us with an alternative, private e-mail address for further
correspondence. In that case, the Commission will send all future
electronic correspondence addressed to you only to that private address,
and it will use only that private address to reply to your request. You
should still remain responsible to inform the private third-party website
about this change of how you wish to communicate with, and receive a reply
from, the Commission.
For information on how we process your personal data visit our page
[5]Privacy statement - access to documents.
Yours faithfully,
ACCESS TO DOCUMENTS TEAM (IC)
[6]cid:image001.gif@01D46531.06A8B6B0
European Commission
Secretariat-General
SG.C1 (Transparency, Document Management and Access to Documents)
[7][email address]
Dear Mrs Verrier,
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 registered on 12 July 2022 under reference number GESTDEM 2022/3994.
Indeed, my request aimed at making public opinions of the Independent Ethical Committee or of the previous Ad Hoc Ethical Committee which have not been published following the withdrawal of an initial notification. I disagree with your conclusion that there is ‘no public interest for citizens to scrutinise documents reflecting past withdrawals’. I also would like a review of the application of article 4(1)b.
First, allow me to lay the case why there is indeed a public interest for citizens to scrutinise documents reflecting past withdrawals. I do not dispute that former Commissioners ‘have the right to seek an authorisation for a post-mandate activity from the administration’, or that they have a right ‘to subsequently change their mind’.
However, the practice which you describe – that if a former Commissioner withdraws her/his notification, the notification and all related documents automatically ‘fall within the private sphere’ – produces a huge loophole.
While you claim that negative opinions may be published if a former Commissioner decides not to withdraw the notification, the option to always withdraw a notification after the Committee produced a negative opinion leads to a situation where former Commissioners can test any intended occupation without the risk of it ever reaching the stage of a Commission decision.
But in the case of former Vice-President Kroes, you have omitted a crucial piece of information. Kroes withdrew her notification, because Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker informed her of the Committee’s negative opinion, and *asked her* to withdraw the notification – which she subsequently did in December 2015.
If Juncker had not done that, former VP Kroes may not have withdrawn the notification, and the Commission would have been in a position where it had to have take a decision. It is quite likely that this would have been a negative decision, which then would have been published.
If a negative decision had been public, the wider public would have been aware of it, and could have been aware of the Commission’s (and Committee’s) position. It would have made it more difficult for former VP Kroes to carry out lobbying activities for Uber, as the media reports shown.
The Kroes case showed that it is possible for a former Commissioner to notify an intended occupation, and then following a negative opinion, evade public scrutiny by withdrawing the notification.
The Code of Conduct, article 11 (4), forbids former Members from lobbying Commission Members or their staff “on behalf of their own business, that of their employer or client, on matters for which they were responsible within their portfolio for a period of two years after ceasing to hold office”.
Article 13 (1) says that the “President, assisted by the Independent Ethical Committee, shall ensure the proper application of this Code of Conduct”.
It was thus the responsibility of the President of the Commission to make sure that following the negative opinion of the Committee, the former Vice-President did not lobby the Commission on behalf of Uber. Since the public was not told of the negative opinion of the Committee – because the President told the former Vice-President to withdraw the notification – the public had no knowledge of the former Vice-President’s intention to lobby for Uber.
The Uber Files showed that she did so despite being told not to, and that subsequently the President has failed to “ensure the proper application of this Code of Conduct”. This is the public interest at play here: if the Commission President decides to advice former Commissioners to withdraw their notification, it is only the President with knowledge of the intention, and thus only the President that can determine violations. The case with Mrs Kroes shows that the President has been unable to prevent an alleged violation of the Code of Conduct – and raises questions of whether other violations of the Code of Conduct have also gone unreported because of actions or inaction by the President.
The Commission said: ‘These requests withdrawn prior to the adoption of a decision are considered not to have been lodged. In consequence, no further follow up was given to them by the Commission. Consequently, they are without relevance for the above-mentioned obligations of former Commissioners and the public interests these obligations aim to protect.’
Irrespective of the Commission’s considerations, any request that has been submitted, has been lodged. This is a fact that cannot be changed by any later withdrawal. The Commission’s point is a logical fallacy, because a notification can only be withdrawn if it was initially lodged.
Furthermore, the phrase that ‘no further follow up was given to them by the Commission’ is false. The Commission did give further follow up: the President informed the former Vice-President of the Committee’s conclusions, and gave her the advice to withdraw the notification. There is thus no longer any case to be made that they have become ‘without relevance for the above-mentioned obligations of former Commissioners and the public interests these obligations aim to protect’.
As for the argument that releasing notifications that have later been withdrawn ‘would harm the privacy and integrity of the Commissioners concerned’, I am not convinced. The use of an exception from Regulation 1049/2001 must be related to a risk that is substantial and non-hypothetical. I do not see that risk.
I agree that the release of notification that were later withdrawn ‘would reveal to the public information and detailed exchanges on initially intended post-mandate professional activities which did not materialise following the withdrawal’. But that alone would not harm the privacy and integrity of the Commissioners concerned. In politics it is very common that (former) Commissioners have made their intendend post-mandate activities public, for example when they run for public office. If they subsequently do not win the election, this does not harm they privacy or integrity.
Former Commissioner’s notifications for professional activities which do materialise, are published. In those cases, the privacy and integrity of the former Commissioners are apparently not harmed. So the Commission argues that the mere fact that an intended professional activity does not materialise, is the reason why publication would harm the privacy and integrity of the former Commissioner. But the Commission has not shown the substantial and non-hypothetical risk that would arise from making public the intention to take up certain post-mandate professional activities that later do not materialise.
The Commission also argues that publication of documents on withdrawn notifications ‘would also potentially harm the privacy and integrity of third persons who might have accepted the declined position instead of the former Commissioner’, without elaborating this further. It is another non-substantial and hypothetical argument. Why would the privacy and integrity be affected of someone who acquired a job that previously a former Commissioner was interested in doing? It does not make any sense.
Additionally, the most ridiculous argument comes later in the same sentence: ‘potentially also the reputation of the entity or entities for which a former Commissioner may have decided to perform a professional activity instead’ may be harmed. Not only is this hypothetical argument unsubstantiated, it also has nothing to do with the privacy and the integrity of an individual. Any entity or entities for which a former Commissioner may have decided to perform a professional activity instead, is not a natural person. They are no individuals, and thus their privacy or integrity cannot be harmed as in the meaning of article 4(1)b.
The Commission argued that “the documents also contain specific personal data of the former Commissioners, namely e-mail and postal addresses, as well as similar personal data that would enable the identification of Commission staff not forming part of senior management”. Very possible. But the Commission can simply redact those e-mails and postal addresses. This does not prevent the Commission from publishing a redacted version of the documents.
The Commission also said that it ‘is not possible to establish a list of documents’ covered by my request because that would deprive the exception from article 4(1)b of its very purpose. I disagree, even when all of my above arguments are dismissed. The Commission could produce a list of withdrawn notifications from each former Commissioner omitting certain details that at least shows the occurrence of notifications being withdrawn before a decision is made. Or, alternatively, it could produce a list that shows the description of intended professional activities without releasing the names of the former Commissioners notifying them. I believe that the Commission could release a list of both, but even if it maintains that it cannot, it could produce a partly redacted list, that will still be in the public interest.
In closing, the case of the Uber Files has shown that the President of the Commission may not have been sufficiently vigilant on the possibility of former Commissioners abusing the option of withdrawing notifications but still taking up the intended occupation anyway. This may erode public trust in the European Commission. By being transparent about other withdrawn notifications, the Commission could regain some of that trust.
Sincerely
Peter Teffer
Follow the Money
Overtoom 197
1054 HT Amsterdam
The Netherlands
Your message has been received by the Transparency Unit of the
Secretariat-General of the European Commission.
Requests for public access to documents are treated on the basis of
[1]Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to
European Parliament, Council and Commission documents.
The Secretariat-General will reply to your request within 15 working days
upon registration of your request and will duly inform you of the
registration of the request (or of any additional information to be
provided in view of its registration and/or treatment).
L’unité «Transparence» du secrétariat général de la Commission européenne
a bien reçu votre message.
Les demandes d’accès du public aux documents sont traitées sur la base du
[2]règlement (CE) n° 1049/2001 du 30 mai 2001 relatif à l’accès du public
aux documents du Parlement européen, du Conseil et de la Commission.
Le secrétariat général répondra à votre demande dans un délai de 15 jours
ouvrables à compter de la date d’enregistrement de votre demande, et vous
informera de cet enregistrement (ou vous indiquera toute information
supplémentaire à fournir en vue de l'enregistrement et/ou du traitement de
votre demande).
Ihre Nachricht ist beim Referat „Transparenz“ des Generalsekretariats der
Europäischen Kommission eingegangen.
Anträge auf Zugang zu Dokumenten werden auf der Grundlage der
[3]Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1049/2001 vom 30. Mai 2001 über den Zugang der
Öffentlichkeit zu Dokumenten des Europäischen Parlaments, des Rates und
der Kommission behandelt.
Das Generalsekretariat beantwortet Ihre Anfrage innerhalb von
15 Arbeitstagen nach deren Registrierung und wird Sie über die
Registrierung Ihres Antrags (oder die Notwendigkeit weiterer Informationen
im Hinblick auf dessen Registrierung und/oder Bearbeitung) unterrichten.
References
Visible links
1. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/...
2. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/...
3. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/...
Dear Sir,
Thank you for your email dated 08/08/2022 by which you request, pursuant
to Regulation No 1049/2001 regarding public access to European Parliament,
Council and Commission documents, a review of the position taken by the
Secretariat-General in reply to your initial application GESTDEM
2022/3994.
We hereby acknowledge receipt of your confirmatory application for access
to documents which was registered on 08/08/2022 (Ares(2022)5632191).
Your application will be handled within 15 working days (30/08/2022). In
case this time limit needs to be extended, you will be informed in due
course.
Please be informed that the answer to your confirmatory application is a
formal Commission decision that will be notified to you by express
delivery. Thank you for providing your contact phone number, so that the
external delivery service can contact you in case of absence.
Please note that the Commission will not use your phone number for any
other purpose than for informing the delivery service, and that it will
delete it immediately thereafter.
Yours faithfully,
Access to documents team (cr)
SG.C.1
Transparency
Link: [1]File-List
Link: [2]Edit-Time-Data
Link: [3]themeData
Link: [4]colorSchemeMapping
[5]Your request for access to documents Gestdem 2022/3994 -
Ares(2022)5800536 (Please use this link only if you are an Ares user –
Svp, utilisez ce lien exclusivement si vous êtes un(e) utilisateur d’Ares)
Dear Mr Teffer,
I refer to your email of 8 August 2022, registered on the same day, by
which you submit a confirmatory application in accordance with Article
7(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 regarding public access to European
Parliament, Council and Commission documents ("Regulation (EC) No
1049/2001"), registered under reference number above.
We are currently handling your confirmatory request, but the description
given in your application does not enable us to establish the temporal
scope of the request.
In your initial application, you request access to ‘[a]ll Independent
Ethical Committee opinions and advices that have not yet been published on
the European Commission website, including but not limited to the 2015
advice regarding the intention by former European Commissioner Neelie
Kroes to work for Uber.’ However, it is not clear to us if your request is
limited to documents of 2015, or if you are interested in documents
covering other time periods as well.
We therefore invite you, in accordance with Article 6(2) of Regulation
(EC) No 1049/2001 regarding public access to documents, to please specify
the periods during which the documents would have been drawn up.
If you need assistance in clarifying or specifying your application, you
can contact us:
- By email to: SG ACCES DOCUMENTS [6][SG request email],
mentioning the Gestdem reference number in the subject of your email.
In accordance with the third paragraph of Article 2 of the Detailed rules
for the application of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, the deadline of 15
working days for handling your application will start running when we
receive the requested clarifications.
Thank you in advance for your understanding.
Yours faithfully,
Access to documents team (cr)
SG.C.1
Transparency
[7]cid:image004.gif@01D4F9CD.7B22B0F0
References
Visible links
1. file:///tmp/cid:filelist.xml@01D8B2FB.3A42C760
2. file:///tmp/cid:editdata.mso
3. file:///tmp/~~themedata~~
4. file:///tmp/~~colorschememapping~~
5. https://webgate.ec.testa.eu/Ares/documen...
6. mailto:[SG request email]
Link: [1]File-List
Link: [2]Edit-Time-Data
Link: [3]themeData
Link: [4]colorSchemeMapping
Dear Mr Teffer,
I refer to your email of 8 August 2022, registered on the same day, by
which you submit a confirmatory application in accordance with Article
7(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 regarding public access to European
Parliament, Council and Commission documents ("Regulation (EC) No
1049/2001"), registered under reference number above.
We are currently handling your confirmatory request, but the description
given in your application does not enable us to establish the temporal
scope of the request.
In your initial application, you request access to ‘[a]ll Independent
Ethical Committee opinions and advices that have not yet been published on
the European Commission website, including but not limited to the 2015
advice regarding the intention by former European Commissioner Neelie
Kroes to work for Uber.’ However, it is not clear to us if your request is
limited to documents of 2015, or if you are interested in documents
covering other time periods as well.
We therefore invite you, in accordance with Article 6(2) of Regulation
(EC) No 1049/2001 regarding public access to documents, to please specify
the periods during which the documents would have been drawn up.
If you need assistance in clarifying or specifying your application, you
can contact us:
• By email to: SG ACCES DOCUMENTS [5][SG request email], mentioning
the Gestdem reference number in the subject of your email.
In accordance with the third paragraph of Article 2 of the Detailed rules
for the application of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, the deadline of 15
working days for handling your application will start running when we
receive the requested clarifications.
Thank you in advance for your understanding.
Yours sincerely,
ACCESS TO DOCUMENTS TEAM (GD)
European Commission
Secretariat-General
SG C.1
[6][email address]
References
Visible links
1. file:///tmp/cid:filelist.xml@01D8B2FB.C7124B70
2. file:///tmp/cid:editdata.mso
3. file:///tmp/~~themedata~~
4. file:///tmp/~~colorschememapping~~
5. mailto:[SG request email]
6. mailto:[email address]
Dear Madam, Sir,
I refer to my confirmatory application for access to documents which was registered on 8 August 2022 (Ares(2022)5632191), and the Commission's request for clarification made on 18 August 2022.
My request is not limited to documents of 2015, but I am interested in documents covering other time periods as well.
It is curious that you would ask this, considering that in the initial reply, the Commission had no problem understanding that I was interested "in obtaining access to opinions of the Independent Ethical Committee or of the previous Ad Hoc Ethical Committee [..] which have not been published following the withdrawal of an initial notification".
Nevertheless, to accommodate your request for a specification of the periods during which the documents would have been drawn up: I am interested in all such documents from the period 1 January 2014 until today.
Sincerely,
Peter
Link: [1]File-List
Link: [2]Edit-Time-Data
Link: [3]themeData
Link: [4]colorSchemeMapping
Dear Mr Teffer,
I refer to your email of 8 August 2022, registered on the same day, by
which you submit a confirmatory application in accordance with Article
7(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 regarding public access to European
Parliament, Council and Commission documents ("Regulation (EC) No
1049/2001"), registered under reference number above.
Your confirmatory application is currently being handled. Unfortunately,
we have not yet been able to finalize the internal consultations needed to
carry out a full analysis of your request and to take a final decision.
Therefore, we are not in a position to reply to your confirmatory request
within the prescribed time limit which expires 30 August 2022.
Consequently, we have to extend this period by another 15 working days in
accordance with Article 8(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001. The new
deadline expires on 20 September 2022.
I regret this additional delay and sincerely apologise for any
inconvenience this may cause. However, I can assure you that we are doing
our utmost to provide you with a final reply as soon as possible.
Yours sincerely,
Mariusz Daca, Ph.D.
Deputy Head of Unit
European Commission
Secretariat General
Unit C.1 (Transparency, Document Management and Access to Documents)
References
Visible links
1. file:///tmp/cid:filelist.xml@01D8BC86.889BC8A0
2. file:///tmp/cid:editdata.mso
3. file:///tmp/~~themedata~~
4. file:///tmp/~~colorschememapping~~
Link: [1]File-List
Link: [2]Edit-Time-Data
Link: [3]themeData
Link: [4]colorSchemeMapping
[5]Your confirmatory application for access to documents under Regulation
(EC) No 1049/2001 - GESTDEM 2022/3994 - Holding letter -
Ares(2022)6491868 (Please use this link only if you are an Ares user –
Svp, utilisez ce lien exclusivement si vous êtes un(e) utilisateur d’Ares)
Dear Mr Teffer,
I refer to your email of 8 August 2022, registered on the same day, by
which you submit a confirmatory application in accordance with Article
7(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 regarding public access to European
Parliament, Council and Commission documents ("Regulation (EC) No
1049/2001"), registered under reference number above.
I also refer to our holding reply of 30 August 2022, by which the time
limit for replying to your confirmatory application was extended by 15
working days, pursuant to Article 8(2) of Regulation 1049/2001. This
extended time limit expires on 20 September 2011.
I regret to inform you that we are still not in a position to reply to
your confirmatory request within the prescribed time limit, as we have not
yet finalized the internal consultations related to your request.
However, I can assure you that we are doing our utmost to provide you with
a final reply as soon as possible. I regret this additional delay and
sincerely apologise for any inconvenience this may cause.
Yours sincerely,
Mariusz Daca, Ph.D.
Deputy Head of Unit
European Commission
Secretariat General
Unit C.1 (Transparency, Document Management and Access to Documents)
References
Visible links
1. file:///tmp/cid:filelist.xml@01D8CD01.508B56C0
2. file:///tmp/cid:editdata.mso
3. file:///tmp/~~themedata~~
4. file:///tmp/~~colorschememapping~~
5. https://webgate.ec.testa.eu/Ares/documen...
Dear Madam, Sir,
Unless I am mistaken, the Secretariat General has not yet replied to my confirmatory application regarding GESTDEM 2022/3994.
The extended deadline to reply expired already on 20 September 2022, almost two months ago.
Can you update me whether the reply has been sent and I have missed it, or if the SG is still working on it?
Sincerely
Peter Teffer
[1]Your confirmatory application for access to documents under Regulation
(EC) No 1049/2001 - GESTDEM 2022/3994 - Holding letter - Ares(2022)6491868
- Ares(2022)7906856 (Please use this link only if you are an Ares user –
Svp, utilisez ce lien exclusivement si vous êtes un(e) utilisateur d’Ares)
Dear Mr Teffer,
We acknowledge receipt of your email. The Secretariat-General is still
working on your request and it is currently at the stage of finalising
internal consultations.
We hope to be able to send you the reply in the coming weeks.
Please accept our apologies for the time taken to issue our decision.
Best regards,
Access to documents team
Secretariat General
Unit C.1 (Transparency, Document Management and Access to Documents) - cr
Dear Madam, Sir,
I refer to GESTDEM 2022/3994, Ares(2022)6491868 and Ares(2022)7906856. On 16 November 2022 the Commission Secretariat-General wrote it was "at the stage of finalising internal consultations" and that it hoped "to be able to send you the reply in the coming weeks". This is to remind you that tomorrow marks three weeks - or 15 working days - since that message, and urge you to speed up your work processes.
Sincerely
Peter Teffer
Your message has been received by the Transparency Unit of the
Secretariat-General of the European Commission.
Requests for public access to documents are treated on the basis of
[1]Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to
European Parliament, Council and Commission documents.
The Secretariat-General will reply to your request within 15 working days
upon registration of your request and will duly inform you of the
registration of the request (or of any additional information to be
provided in view of its registration and/or treatment).
L’unité «Transparence» du secrétariat général de la Commission européenne
a bien reçu votre message.
Les demandes d’accès du public aux documents sont traitées sur la base du
[2]règlement (CE) n° 1049/2001 du 30 mai 2001 relatif à l’accès du public
aux documents du Parlement européen, du Conseil et de la Commission.
Le secrétariat général répondra à votre demande dans un délai de 15 jours
ouvrables à compter de la date d’enregistrement de votre demande, et vous
informera de cet enregistrement (ou vous indiquera toute information
supplémentaire à fournir en vue de l'enregistrement et/ou du traitement de
votre demande).
Ihre Nachricht ist beim Referat „Transparenz“ des Generalsekretariats der
Europäischen Kommission eingegangen.
Anträge auf Zugang zu Dokumenten werden auf der Grundlage der
[3]Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1049/2001 vom 30. Mai 2001 über den Zugang der
Öffentlichkeit zu Dokumenten des Europäischen Parlaments, des Rates und
der Kommission behandelt.
Das Generalsekretariat beantwortet Ihre Anfrage innerhalb von
15 Arbeitstagen nach deren Registrierung und wird Sie über die
Registrierung Ihres Antrags (oder die Notwendigkeit weiterer Informationen
im Hinblick auf dessen Registrierung und/oder Bearbeitung) unterrichten.
References
Visible links
1. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/...
2. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/...
3. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/...
Dear Mr Peter Teffer,
Please find attached the electronic version of the Commission Decision
C(2022)9559 as adopted by the European Commission on 12.12.2022.
The formal notification of the decision under Article 297 TFEU is being
made only in electronic form.
Could you please confirm receipt of the attached document by return
e-mail?
Many thanks in advance.
Kind regards,
Dimitra PROTOPSALTI
SG.B2 Procédures écrites, habilitation, délégation
European Commission
Secretariat-General
BERL 005/155
B-1049 Brussels, Belgium
Tél: (+32) 2 29 56750
Dear Mr Peter Teffer,
Unless we are mistaken, and while checking our records, we have not
received your confirmation of receipt regarding the message below.
Could you please acknowledge the receipt of the document enclosed in the
message addressed to you, by return email?
Kind regards,
Dimitra PROTOPSALTI
SG.B2 Procédures écrites, habilitation, délégation
European Commission
Secretariat-General
BERL 005/155
B-1049 Brussels, Belgium
Tél: (+32) 2 29 56750
From: SG GREFFE CERTIFICATION <[email address]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2022 2:21 PM
To: [FOI #11550 email]
Cc: WADHWANIA Nadia (SG) <[email address]>
Subject: C(2022)9559 - Follow the Money - Peter Teffer
Dear Mr Peter Teffer,
Please find attached the electronic version of the Commission Decision
C(2022)9559 as adopted by the European Commission on 12.12.2022.
The formal notification of the decision under Article 297 TFEU is being
made only in electronic form.
Could you please confirm receipt of the attached document by return
e-mail?
Many thanks in advance.
Kind regards,
Dimitra PROTOPSALTI
SG.B2 Procédures écrites, habilitation, délégation
European Commission
Secretariat-General
BERL 005/155
B-1049 Brussels, Belgium
Tél: (+32) 2 29 56750
Dear Mr Peter Teffer,
Unless we are mistaken, and while checking our records, we have not
received your confirmation of receipt regarding the message below.
Could you please acknowledge the receipt of the document enclosed in the
message addressed to you, by return email?
Kind regards,
Dimitra PROTOPSALTI
SG.B2 Procédures écrites, habilitation, délégation
European Commission
Secretariat-General
BERL 005/155
B-1049 Brussels, Belgium
Tél: (+32) 2 29 56750
From: SG GREFFE CERTIFICATION <[email address]>
Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2022 11:14 AM
To: [FOI #11550 email]
Subject: C(2022)9559 - Follow the Money - Peter Teffer
Dear Mr Peter Teffer,
Unless we are mistaken, and while checking our records, we have not
received your confirmation of receipt regarding the message below.
Could you please acknowledge the receipt of the document enclosed in the
message addressed to you, by return email?
Kind regards,
Dimitra PROTOPSALTI
SG.B2 Procédures écrites, habilitation, délégation
European Commission
Secretariat-General
BERL 005/155
B-1049 Brussels, Belgium
Tél: (+32) 2 29 56750
From: SG GREFFE CERTIFICATION <[1][email address]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2022 2:21 PM
To: [2][FOI #11550 email]
Cc: WADHWANIA Nadia (SG) <[3][email address]>
Subject: C(2022)9559 - Follow the Money - Peter Teffer
Dear Mr Peter Teffer,
Please find attached the electronic version of the Commission Decision
C(2022)9559 as adopted by the European Commission on 12.12.2022.
The formal notification of the decision under Article 297 TFEU is being
made only in electronic form.
Could you please confirm receipt of the attached document by return
e-mail?
Many thanks in advance.
Kind regards,
Dimitra PROTOPSALTI
SG.B2 Procédures écrites, habilitation, délégation
European Commission
Secretariat-General
BERL 005/155
B-1049 Brussels, Belgium
Tél: (+32) 2 29 56750
References
Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
2. mailto:[FOI #11550 email]
3. mailto:[email address]
Dear Madam, Sir,
I confirm receipt of the electronic version of the Commission Decision C(2022)9559 as adopted by the European Commission on 12.12.2022.
best
Peter Teffer