Corporate Europe Observatory

Exposing the power of corporate lobbying in the EU

European Ombudsman demands EFSA admits failure over revolving door

  • Dansk
  • Nederlands
  • English
  • Suomi
  • Français
  • Deutsch
  • Ελληνικά
  • Italiano
  • Bokmål
  • Polski
  • Portuguese
  • Română
  • Slovenščina
  • Español
  • Svenska

Munich/ Brussels, 8 December 2011: The European Ombudsman has ruled in favour of a complaint filed by Testbiotech against the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) regarding its approach to the 'revolving door'. The case concerns a former senior staff member at EFSA, Dr Suzy Renckens, who was head of the unit responsible for the risk assessment of genetically engineered plants for five years until 2008. Dr Renckens, a Belgian national, then moved to a job at Syngenta, a company that produces and markets these plants. The European Ombudsman has now agreed with Testbiotech's complaint and ruled that “EFSA should acknowledge that it failed to observe the relevant procedural rules and to carry out a sufficiently thorough assessment of the potential conflict of interests arising from the move of a former member of its staff to a biotechnology company”[1]. 

“The ruling from the Ombudsman shows in detail that EFSA failed to fulfill its obligations,” said Christoph Then from Testbiotech. “We are very concerned that both EFSA and the Commission have tried to deny their responsibilities in this case by rejecting our original complaints. The authority and the European Commission, which backs EFSA, are eroding confidence in European institutions. In consequence they are putting at risk the protection of consumers and the environment.”

Olivier Hoedeman from Corporate Europe Observatory said: “There have been other cases of staff going through the revolving door; EFSA should look carefully at the ruling and introduce a far stricter approach to conflicts of interest in the future. The Ombudsman makes some important recommendations which should lead to changes in how revolving door rules are implemented across the EU institutions, including at the Commission. We continue to see further scandalous revolving doors cases [2] and it is vital that the EU institutions, starting with the Commission, put improved rules and procedures in place to prevent future conflicts of interest, including a cooling off period of several years. It is time for a new start. No more business as usual.”

The Suzy Renckens case was made public by Testbiotech in November 2009 and the complaint was supported by Corporate Europe Observatory (CEO), Friends of the Earth Europe (FoEE) and Lobbycontrol (in Germany)[3]. EFSA now has until 31 March 2012 to respond to the judgement of the EU Ombudsman who has the power to table the issue in the European Parliament.

ENDS

Contact:

Testbiotech: Christoph Then, Tel +49 15154638040, info@testbiotech.org

CEO: Vicky Cann, Corporate Europe Observatory, tel: +32 28 93 09 30, mobile: +32 489 596 478

Notes:

[1] A link to the full ruling from the European Ombudsman can be found here: http://www.testbiotech.de/en/node/588

[2] CEO's RevolvingDoorWatch was launched on 7 December and it presents details of many other revolving door cases, including other cases at EFSA, and others concerning food industry lobbyists: http://www.corporateeurope.org/projects/revolvingdoorwatch

[3] All documents related to this complaint can be found here: http://www.testbiotech.de/independence

Related issues: 
 
There has never been a more important time to ensure that the EU's top decision-makers are free from possible conflicts of interest.
David Cameron's nomination of a revolving door ex-lobbyist, Jonathan Hopkin Hill, as EU commissioner is bad news for Jean-Claude Juncker's newly-stated commitment to lobby transparency.
Fresh evidence from the French online newspaper Mediapart has cast new light on just how intimate the relations between the controversial tobacco industry and MEPs can be.
Read our response to the EU ombudsman in her inquiry into the commission's handling of the revolving door.
There has never been a more important time to ensure that the EU's top decision-makers are free from possible conflicts of interest.
Scientific advice should be transparent, objective and independent, and there should be more science and more diverse expertise available to the European Commission’s President, a coalition of 28 international and national NGOs wrote in a letter addressed to President-elect Jean-Claude Juncker today (1).
A few observations on the debate sparked by our open letter on the position of Chief Scientific Advisor to the President of the European Commission, and on the need for proper scientific advice to EU legislators.
The position of Chief Scientific Adviser to the President of the European Commission is problematic, concentrating too much influence in one person and undermining other Commission research and assessment processes. We ask Mr Juncker, the new President of the European Commission, to scrap the position.

Corporate Europe Forum