After a long tug-of-war between the European Commission and The New York Times over transparency surrounding the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine contracts, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) today ruled that the Commission “has not given a plausible explanation to justify the non-possession of the requested documents.”
According to the Court, the Commission cannot simply claim it does not hold the requested documents; it must provide credible explanations that enable both the public and the Court to understand why those documents cannot be located.
The ECJ found that The New York Times had submitted relevant and consistent evidence indicating the existence of text messages between the President of the Commission and the CEO of Pfizer regarding the procurement of COVID-19 vaccines.
“These contracts were totally unprecedented in a totally unprecedented context,” said an EU official ahead of the ruling.
The Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine was the first to receive EU authorisation in December 2020, after an advance purchase agreement for 200 million doses.
Subsequent contracts in March and May 2021 secured an additional €2.4 billion worth of doses, with an option for 900 million more.
The publication uncovered the existence of the messages in 2021 during interviews with Bourla, but encountered obstacles when requesting access to them. The Commission claimed it could not provide the texts.
After repeated unsuccessful attempts to obtain the messages, The New York Times brought the matter before the ECJ in January 2023.
The executive will also “adopt a new decision providing a more detailed explanation” following the New York Times original request, the Commission said.
“Transparency has always been of paramount importance for the Commission and President von der Leyen. We will continue to strictly abide by the solid legal framework in place to enforce our obligations,” they added.
Read More: EU Commission loses on all counts in Pfizergate legal case
