Brussels has proposed a sweeping reform aimed at weakening transparency within the European Commission, sparking controversy among officials and experts. The initiative, outlined in a leaked document obtained by the portal Contexte, was developed over nine months through a study involving around 150 civil servants. The proposal suggests changes to administrative practices, particularly concerning access to documents and information freedom. The document, which has already caused unrest before its official release, is attributed to high-ranking officials with deep knowledge of the Commission’s operations. They advocate for a kind of “Perestroika” within Brussels, calling for clearer guidelines, more modern tools, and stronger operational support in handling requests for information. The current process for accessing documents is described as overly burdensome. Outdated concepts, inconsistent archiving procedures, a perceived sharp increase in request numbers, and high costs due to manual redaction of sensitive passages have placed pressure on the administration. To address these issues, the authors propose clearer directives, better archival practices, and improved record-keeping. This part of the document can be interpreted as a quiet critique of leadership, especially given repeated criticism of the Commission's transparency, notably linked to the disappearance of chat messages from President Ursula von der Leyen. While some aspects of the reform could find general approval, such as organizational adjustments related to digitization and archiving, other sections raise concerns. The authors claim that the number of requests for document access continues to rise, contradicting the Commission’s own annual reports showing a decline in such inquiries over recent years. Based on this questionable premise, they argue that transparency demands hinder the creation of a protected space for internal policy-making. Such a space, they suggest, is necessary to encourage experimentation and responsible risk-taking. Legal experts remain skeptical of these arguments. Existing EU legal frameworks already allow authorities to refuse disclosure of documents if it seriously impairs internal decision-making. European courts have repeatedly affirmed this right to an undisturbed thought space for public bodies. Moreover, von der Leyen herself tightened rules for finding and providing documents only at the beginning of her second term in late 2024. The recommendations mark the start of a broader debate. In October, a high-level expert group led by Catherine Day, a former Commission secretary-general, will assess the proposals. On this basis, Commissioner Piotr Serafin will draft an official report, which must be approved by the entire Commission collegium. Whether this anticipated restructuring will truly enhance efficiency or further limit the already criticized openness of EU institutions remains to be seen. Meanwhile, protests against the planned erosion of information freedom have begun in Germany.
1 articles
heise onlineIndépendantCentreFactualité 65Objectivité 55il y a 5 hL'article traite d'un document interne de la Commission européenne qui a fait l'objet d'une fuite et qui propose des réformes administratives visant à améliorer la transparence et l'accès à l'information au sein de l'institution. La réforme, qui est le résultat d'une étude de neuf mois impliquant environ 150 fonctionnaires, critique les pratiques actuelles telles que les procédures obsolètes, la documentation incohérente, les coûts élevés dus à la rédaction manuelle et une augmentation présumée des volumes de demandes.
Lecture du biais (Centre): Bien que l'article critique la manière dont la Commission gère la transparence, il souligne également les préoccupations exprimées par des experts juridiques quant à la portée potentielle des réformes proposées.
Pourquoi factualité (65): The article mentions the reform efforts by Piotr Serafin and references a leaked document from Contexte, which aligns with the primary source. However, it introduces new information not present in the original text, such as 'Brussels Perestroika' and criticism of transparency practices, which are no
Pourquoi objectivité (55): The article uses emotionally charged terms like 'schwächen' (weaken) and 'drastischer Anstieg' (drastic increase) when discussing document access procedures. It also frames the reforms as potentially undermining transparency, introducing a biased perspective not directly supported by the primary sou
★
Gardons l’information honnête.
ObjectiveNews est financé par ses lecteurs et sans publicité : nous vous montrons le biais au lieu de le cacher. Soutenez un journalisme indépendant pour 5 €/mois.
Devenir soutien
Germany
