EIT Manufacturing OLAF report
Dear Madam, Sir,
Under the right of access to documents in the EU treaties, as developed in Regulation 1049/2001, I am requesting the report on the investigation which according to press reports has found "serious irregularities" in EIT Manufacturing.
I only require a digital copy and am requesting you refrain from physical postal communication.
I am of course available to clarify my request further if needed.
Sincerely
Peter Teffer
Follow the Money
Overtoom 197
1054HT Amsterdam
Dear Mr Teffer,
We acknowledge the receipt of your request for public access to documents of 12 February 2026 below.
In accordance with Regulation 1049/2001, your application will be handled within 15 working days from the date of registration.
The time limit will expire on 5 March 2026. In case this time limit needs to be extended, you will be informed in due course.
Yours sincerely,
EUROPEAN COMMISSION
EUROPEAN ANTI-FRAUD OFFICE (OLAF)
Directorate D – Legal, Resources and Partnerships
Unit D.2 – Legal Advice
[OLAF request email]
Rue Joseph II, 30 • B-1000 Brussels (Belgium)
http://ec.europa.eu/anti_fraud
Our policy regarding personal data protection can be viewed on http://ec.europa.eu/anti_fraud/about-us/...
Dear Mr Teffer,
We refer to your request for access to documents below of 12 February 2026 pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001.
We write to inform you that unfortunately we will not be in a position to complete the handling of your application within the time limit of 15 working days, which expires today 5 March 2026. An extended time limit is needed for further internal consultations and for the approval and signature of the reply.
Therefore, we need to extend the time limit with 15 working days in accordance with Article 7(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001.
The new time limit will expire on 26 March 2026.
Thank you for your understanding.
Yours sincerely,
EUROPEAN COMMISSION
EUROPEAN ANTI-FRAUD OFFICE (OLAF)
Directorate D – Legal, Resources and Partnerships Unit D.2 – Legal Advice [OLAF request email]
Rue Joseph II, 30 • B-1000 Brussels (Belgium) http://ec.europa.eu/anti_fraud Our policy regarding personal data protection can be viewed on http://ec.europa.eu/anti_fraud/about-us/...
Dear Madam, Sir,
I refer to my access to documents request, submitted on 12 February 2026, for the report on the investigation which according to press reports has found "serious irregularities" in EIT Manufacturing.
The time limit to reply has expired on 26 March 2026, yet I have not yet received a reply.
There is no further legal basis for additional delay. Please respect the rule of law and send the reply immediately.
Sincerely,
Peter Teffer
Dear Mr Teffer,
We refer to your request for access to documents below.
Unfortunately, we were not able to complete the handling of your application by 26 March 2026, but we would like to confirm that the handling of your application is in progress and inform you that we will send you a reply as soon as possible.
We apologise for the delay and thank you for the understanding.
Yours sincerely,
EUROPEAN COMMISSION
EUROPEAN ANTI-FRAUD OFFICE (OLAF)
Directorate D – Legal, Resources and Partnerships Unit D.2 – Legal Advice [OLAF request email]
Rue Joseph II, 30 • B-1000 Brussels (Belgium) http://ec.europa.eu/anti_fraud Our policy regarding personal data protection can be viewed on http://ec.europa.eu/anti_fraud/about-us/...
Dear Mr Teffer,
Please find enclosed the reply to your application for public access to
documents dated 12 February 2026.
We would kindly ask you to acknowledge the receipt of this email.
We also apologise for the delay in handling your request.
Yours sincerely,
EUROPEAN COMMISSION
EUROPEAN ANTI-FRAUD OFFICE (OLAF)
[1]OLAFEN-low-resolution2
Directorate D – Legal, Resources and Partnerships
Unit D.2 – Legal Advice
[2][OLAF request email]
Rue Joseph II, 30 • B-1000 Brussels (Belgium)
[3]http://ec.europa.eu/anti_fraud
Our policy regarding personal data protection can be viewed on
[4]http://ec.europa.eu/anti_fraud/about-us/...
References
Visible links
2. mailto:[OLAF request email]
3. http://ec.europa.eu/anti_fraud
4. http://ec.europa.eu/anti_fraud/about-us/...
Dear Madam, Sir,
I refer to your decision regarding my initial access to documents request, registered by OLAF under reference number OCM(2026)6687.
Please pass this on to the person who reviews confirmatory applications. I am filing a confirmatory application.
OLAF argued that the documents cannot be disclosed because an unidentified "competent follow-up authority" was "still pursuing follow-up actions" in response to the final reports. This argument is problematic for several reasons.
1. OLAF has failed to identify in its reply the "competent follow-up authority", thereby making it impossible for me as applicant to rebut this argument or check myself if this authority is still pursuing follow-up actions. This is also a failure to give adequate reasons, as required by Article 296 TFEU.
2. The argument that other authorities are still pursuing follow-up actions cannot be used indefinitely. As OLAF noted itself, the reports were transmitted to this authority "respectively in October 2024 and in December 2025". The argument is weak especially in relation to the first report, submitted to the follow-up authority 18 months ago. If the delayed follow-up actions of a follow-up authority are allowed to prevent disclosure of documents ad infinitum, this contradicts what the Court of Justice said in its ruling in the case T-517/19, Homoki v Commission. The Court has concluded there should be limits to the general presumption in relation to the protection of the purpose of its investigations. Public access should not be hindered by the speed and diligence of this follow-up authority. 18 months is not a reasonable period to continue keeping the documents confidential.
3. By not naming the competent follow-up authority, and by not explaining how follow-up actions might be harmed, OLAF has failed to give a reason that is "reasonably foreseeable and not purely hypothetical". Especially since the first report (18 months) but even since the second report (four months) an amount of time has passed that ensures the investigated body (EIT Manufacturing) is fully aware of the contents of the report. Therefore, there is no risk to making it available to a wider audience.
4. There is an overriding public interest to make the documents public. EIT Manufacturing has received taxpayer-funded grants. It is a KIC, of which nine others exist. Many hundreds of millions of EU money has gone to these KICs. Democratic scrutiny requires that journalists like myself are able to read the requested reports to see what went wrong in the case of EIT Manufacturing and how similar irregularities in other KICs can be prevented.
Even if full access is denied, partial access should be possible.
Sincerely
Peter Teffer
Dear Sir,
Thank you for your e-mail of 24 April 2026. We hereby acknowledge receipt of your application for access to documents.
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 after registration.
The time limit will expire on 18 May 2026. In case this time limit needs to be extended, you will be informed in due course.
Yours sincerely,
EUROPEAN COMMISSION
EUROPEAN ANTI-FRAUD OFFICE (OLAF)
Directorate D – Legal, Resources and Partnerships
Unit D.2 – Legal Advice
[OLAF request email]
Rue Joseph II, 30 • B-1000 Brussels (Belgium)
http://ec.europa.eu/anti_fraud
Our policy regarding personal data protection can be viewed on http://ec.europa.eu/anti_fraud/about-us/...
Dear Mr Teffer,
We refer to your confirmatory application of 24 April 2026 pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001.
First, we would like to inform you that the deadline of 15 working days for handling your confirmatory application will expire on 20 May 2026 and not on 18 May 2026, as wrongly indicated in our previous message below.
Second, we would like to inform you that unfortunately we will not be in a position to complete the handling of your application within the time limit of 15 working days, which will expire on 20 May 2026. An extended time limit is needed to perform the necessary internal consultations and for the approval and signature of the reply.
Therefore, we need to extend the time limit with 15 working days in accordance with Article 8(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001.
The new time limit will expire on 11 June 2026.
Thank you for your understanding.
Yours sincerely,
EUROPEAN COMMISSION
EUROPEAN ANTI-FRAUD OFFICE (OLAF)
Directorate D – Legal, Resources and Partnerships Unit D.2 – Legal Advice [OLAF request email]
Rue Joseph II, 30 • B-1000 Brussels (Belgium) http://ec.europa.eu/anti_fraud Our policy regarding personal data protection can be viewed on http://ec.europa.eu/anti_fraud/about-us/...
Dear Madam, Sir,
I refer to my confirmatory application for the documents request registered by OLAF under reference number OCM(2026)6687.
Last week, on 11 June, the extended time limit to reply, expired. However, I have not yet received a decision. There is no legal basis for any further delay. Please provide a confirmatory decision without delay.
Sincerely
Peter Teffer
Dear Mr Teffer,
Please find attached the reply to your confirmatory application of 24
April 2026.
We would kindly ask you to acknowledge the receipt of this email.
We also apologise for the delay.
Kind regards,
EUROPEAN COMMISSION
EUROPEAN ANTI-FRAUD OFFICE (OLAF)
[1]OLAFEN-low-resolution2
Directorate D – Legal, Resources and Partnerships
Unit D.2 – Legal Advice
[2][OLAF request email]
Rue Joseph II, 30 • B-1000 Brussels (Belgium)
[3]http://ec.europa.eu/anti_fraud
Our policy regarding personal data protection can be viewed on
[4]http://ec.europa.eu/anti_fraud/about-us/...
References
Visible links
2. mailto:[OLAF request email]
3. http://ec.europa.eu/anti_fraud
4. http://ec.europa.eu/anti_fraud/about-us/...
Dear Madam, Sir,
I acknowledge receipt of your reply to my confirmatory application regarding the final reports of the OLAF investigations OC/2021/1085/A2 and OC/2024/0668/A2.
Sincerely
Peter Teffer
Peter left an annotation ()
Complaint filed to the European Ombudsman (1468/2026/SF)