Categories
Research

Challenging the EU Institutions on Transparency – What is the Role of Academics?

The Academy of Finland-funded research project “Transparency in the EU: from reaction to manifesto” aims at breaking down the practices assigned to transparency in the EU, laying bare shortcomings and seeking solutions. TrUE project researchers Päivi Leino-Sandberg and Maarten Hillebrandt provide some examples of the types of researcher-institution interactions to which the project has led, and the lessons that can be drawn from them.

Credit: EU Law Live
Categories
Case law Research

TrUE webinar on academic challenges to access decisions

Webinar “Challenging the European institutions on transparency: Analysing Leino-Sandberg v Parliament and two Ombudsman complaints” to take place on Thursday 18 February 2021.

Categories
Legal reform Practice

The big lesson after ten years of EU transparency reforms? You will never get it right

The Lisbon Treaty recently celebrated its tenth anniversary. The Treaty, which laid the fundament for a reformed European Union, entered into force with the promise that European decision making would become more transparent, and therefore more democratic. On the tenth birthday, Maarten Hillebrandt considers what has come of these ambitions.

Credit: El País.
Categories
Case law Practice

Landmark access case requires Parliament to publish legislative negotiation documents fully and immediately

Emilio de Capitani (photo credit: EUD Observatory/YouTube)

In a landmark case delivered on Thursday 22 March, the EU’s General Court requires the European Parliament to publish legislative negotiation documents (known by EU insiders as the “trilogue four-column document”) not only fully, but also immediately.

Case T-540/15 was brought by Emilio de Capitani, who had been refused access to the full negotiation document in ongoing legislative processes in the area of justice and home affairs.

Against the Parliament’s assertion that access to the full document could not be granted while negotiations were under way without jeopardising the legislative process, the Court found that no legal grounds existed in the access to documents act (Regulation 1049/01) to postpone disclosure of the document, as the act states should be the legal default position.