Corporate Europe Observatory

Exposing the power of corporate lobbying in the EU

  • Dansk
  • NL
  • EN
  • FI
  • FR
  • DE
  • EL
  • IT
  • NO
  • PL
  • PT
  • RO
  • SL
  • ES
  • SV

Commission sued for lack of transparency

Brussels, May 26, 2011 – The European Commission was sued today, accused of violating European transparency laws. Environmental law organisation ClientEarth, Friends of the Earth Europe (FoEE), FERN and Corporate Europe Observatory (CEO) filed the lawsuit following the Commission’s refusal to provide access to information in decisions relating to the sustainability of Europe’s biofuels policy [1].



The case before the General Court of the EU seeks to annul the Commission’s decision to refuse public access to information about voluntary certification schemes used to ensure compliance with EU criteria on biofuel sustainability. In 2010 a request for information about organisations that had applied to operate the schemes, and how they are chosen, was rejected by the Commission. This was challenged in December, but despite a deadline of 4 February 2011, the Commission has
still not responded [2].



The Renewable Energy Directive sets a 10 per cent target for use of renewable energy in the transport sector - expected to be met by increased production of biofuels. Increased pressure on land driven by the surge in demand for biofuels is resulting in increased greenhouse gas emissions as well as threatening vulnerable communities and biodiversity. The sustainability criteria are intended to prevent the most severe environmental impacts by requiring biofuels to protect high carbon stock areas and biodiversity standards set out in the Directive – social impacts are ignored.

Compliance is monitored by accredited voluntary certification schemes. These are accredited by the Commission to gauge whether consignments of biofuels meet sustainability criteria set out in the Renewable Energy Directive. The EU is currently considering which of these schemes it will accredit, but the process has lacked transparency.


James Thornton, ClientEarth CEO, said: “The amount of money at stake over Europe’s biofuels policy is colossal, and so is the potential for environmental devastation. These policies are too important to shield from scrutiny, decision making processes need to be more participatory. We need to know which organisations have applied to run voluntary certification schemes, and how they’ve been chosen, so that we can be certain that they will provide robust and reliable information.”



Robbie Blake, Friends of the Earth Europe’s campaigner on biofuels, said: “The European Commission has continually evaded its legal responsibility to disclose even the most basic information about voluntary certification schemes for Europe’s biofuels. The stakes are high – ineffective certification schemes will give the green light to environmental abuse. We need transparency and participation in EU policy making – not secrecy and suspicion.”



Nina Holland, Corporate Europe Observatory, said: “Voluntary schemes, including the roundtables on palm oil and responsible soy, allow industry to greenwash damaging monoculture crops without taking account of the environmental or social costs. The Commission must lift the veil of secrecy or companies will continue to use these schemes to improve their image, without changing the way they operate.”


***

NOTES



[1] An EU comitology committee on the sustainability of biofuels will meet on Friday 27 May to discuss a first series of 7 voluntary certification schemes. Information on the basis of which these schemes have been assessed is not publicly available. Nor is any information available on the other schemes that are still under assessment.



[2] ClientEarth launched two other law-suits against the EU Commission for lack of transparency over biofuels policy in 2010. For details read this press release:
<http://www.clientearth.org/european-union-sued-for-lack-of-transparency>


***

For more information please contact:
George Leigh, ClientEarth, communications officer t. +44 (0) 203 030 5951 | m. +44 (0) 7538 418460 | e.
gleigh@clientearth.org

Robbie Blake, biofuels campaigner, Friends of the Earth Europe t. +32 2893 1017, robbie.blake@foeeurope.org

Nina Holland, Corporate Europe Observatory, nina@corporateeurope.org

Related issues: 
 

The official EU assessment of glyphosate was based on unpublished studies owned by industry. Seven months later, the pesticide industry still fights disclosure and, so far, successfully. We obtained a copy of their arguments.

Biodiversity collapse, the future of agriculture, politics versus science, EU States and the European Commission shifting blame on each other, industry's capture of the regulatory process through data secrecy, a Commissioner caught between Juncker, EU States, lobby groups, and his own services... The glyphosate saga, coming to the end of its first phase tomorrow, has been an entry point into many broader problems. Overview.

On 15 June 2016, the Commission will finally announce the long-awaited scientific criteria for EDCs. Time to do a recap of this last season’s main episodes.

This May is dense on the EU chemicals regulation front. Crunch time for two major files: the European Commission needs to publish the identification criteria for endocrine disrupting chemicals, and together with EU States must decide how, or not, renew the market approval of glyphosate, an herbicide produced and defended by Monsanto. Last week, the Professor Alan Boobis happened to be involved in both.

The official EU assessment of glyphosate was based on unpublished studies owned by industry. Seven months later, the pesticide industry still fights disclosure and, so far, successfully. We obtained a copy of their arguments.

While CEO is not taking a position on the UK referendum, many of our publications are relevant to those who will have a vote, or those who are following the debate.

Biodiversity collapse, the future of agriculture, politics versus science, EU States and the European Commission shifting blame on each other, industry's capture of the regulatory process through data secrecy, a Commissioner caught between Juncker, EU States, lobby groups, and his own services... The glyphosate saga, coming to the end of its first phase tomorrow, has been an entry point into many broader problems. Overview.

The European Commission proposal on scientific criteria defining endocrine disruptors (EDCs) is the latest dangerous outgrowth of a highly toxic debate. The chemical lobby, supported by certain Commission factions (notably DG SANTE and the Secretary-General) and some member states (UK and Germany), has put significant obstacles in the way of effective public health and environment regulation.

The corporate lobby tour