The European Union’s General Court delivered a landmark ruling on May 14, 2025, annulling the European Commission’s refusal to grant The New York Times access to text messages between Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla during Covid-19 vaccine negotiations. Dubbed “Pfizergate,” the case has reignited debates over transparency and accountability in the EU, with the court criticizing the Commission for failing to provide a “plausible explanation” for not locating the texts. This article explores the ruling’s implications, a historical milestone in EU transparency, and the growing calls for reform.
The Pfizergate Ruling: A Blow to the Commission
In 2022, New York Times journalist Matina Stevi requested access to text messages exchanged between von der Leyen and Bourla from January 1, 2021, to May 11, 2022, under the EU’s Access to Documents Regulation. The messages, reportedly tied to a €35 billion deal for 1.8 billion Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine doses, were first revealed in a 2021 New York Times article citing interviews with both von der Leyen and Bourla The New York Times. The Commission denied the request, claiming it did not possess the texts, prompting Stevi and the NYT to challenge the decision in the EU’s General Court.
The court ruled that the Commission “did not provide in the contested decision any plausible explanation as to why it had not been able to find the requested documents” European Court of Justice. It found that the NYT provided “relevant and consistent evidence” of the texts’ existence, including Bourla’s statement that he and von der Leyen “exchanged text messages” to discuss vaccine negotiations. The Commission’s claim that the texts were “short-lived” or lacked policy significance was rejected, as EU law requires institutions to retain and account for all documents related to their activities General Court Ruling.
🚨 BREAKING:
— Rob Roos 🇳🇱 (@Rob_Roos) May 14, 2025
The ECJ ruled Von der Leyen was wrong to hide her texts with Pfizer’s CEO—€35B in taxpayer money at stake.
Yet my case as an MEP was ruled inadmissible, while a foreign newspaper was accepted. Transparency isn’t optional. Democracy demands it. Back to court.
Let… https://t.co/4UbRVk55qk
The court also criticized the Commission’s procedural failures, noting its reliance on “assumptions and imprecise information” and its inability to clarify whether the texts were deleted or if von der Leyen’s phone was replaced. This breached the principle of good administration under Article 41 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, leading the court to annul the Commission’s decision and order it to pay the NYT’s legal costs Euractiv.
Historical Fact: The EU’s Transparency Register
The EU’s push for transparency gained momentum with the 2011 launch of the Transparency Register, a voluntary database for lobbyists and organizations engaging with EU institutions. Prompted by earlier scandals, such as the 2008 “cash-for-amendments” controversy involving MEPs, the register aimed to make interactions between EU officials and interest groups more open. By 2025, over 12,000 organizations are registered, but critics argue it remains voluntary and lacks enforcement, highlighting ongoing challenges in ensuring accountability, as seen in Pfizergate Transparency International.
Political Fallout and Calls for Reform
The ruling has fueled criticism of von der Leyen’s leadership, with Dutch MEP Raquel García Hermida-van der Walle calling it a “slam dunk for transparency” Politico. On X, former MEP Rob Roos emphasized that “transparency isn’t optional,” while Hungarian MEP András László decried a pattern of “corruption scandals” in Brussels X. Polish MEP Anna Bryłka and Spanish MEP Hermann Tertsch even called for von der Leyen’s resignation, citing the need for a parliamentary inquiry X.
The Commission’s response, claiming that “transparency has always been of paramount importance,” has been met with skepticism, especially given its recent changes to transparency guidelines that presume non-disclosure for certain documents Follow the Money. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office is also investigating the vaccine deal, raising further questions about accountability Politico. While the Commission has two months to appeal, the ruling could set a precedent for treating text messages as official documents, reshaping EU transparency practices.
Author: Planet-Today.com
Via European Court of Justice, X
Explore more on Pfizergate scandal, EU transparency, Ursula von der Leyen, Pfizer vaccine deal, General Court decision.