23 EU commissioners face extra conflict of interest questions, 3 cleared

Only three of the 26 incoming European commissioners who had backgrounds checks conducted by MEPs Thursday were given a clean bill of financial health in what was described as a “mayhem” session.

Poland’s Piotr Serafin, Hungary’s Olivér Várhelyi and the Netherlands’ Wopke Hoekstra were found to have no conflicts of interest by the European Parliament’s legal affairs committee (known as JURI), an email circulated by the Greens group and according to three lawmakers close to the discussions. They were granted anonymity to discuss the behind-closed-doors talks.

Hoekstra is “an example to be followed” in terms of information disclosure, said one of the lawmakers. But The Left group, in a press conference following the meeting, said that he needs to disclose the clients he worked for when employed by McKinsey, a consultancy.

During a three-and-a-half-hour session discussing the 26 declarations in alphabetical order, grievances between political groups quickly came to the fore. One of the MEPs quoted above said the meeting was “mayhem” with a lot of factions “fighting.”

The MEPs on the committee do background checks as the first part of the Parliament’s screening process. They have the power to reject nominees if they feel there’s a conflict of interest. The next stage is a grilling by relevant parliamentary committees, to take place from Nov. 4 to 12.

The committee ultimately agreed, by a simple majority, that 23 of the Commission nominees should be sent a set of general questions. That will allow them to provide more information, as a lot of the forms were largely empty, as POLITICO reported. The commissioners fill in the declarations themselves and can choose what to answer.

On paper, nominees are supposed to disclose any assets above €10,000, and lawmakers saw it as “hardly credible” that just a few nominees disclosed such wealth, one of the MEPs said, adding that the extra questions were “to ensure that they had all understood the meaning of the exercise.”

The Left’s chief, Manon Aubry, was outraged at the lack of transparency in the process, arguing her group is “angry” because commissioners did not declare enough information.

“It’s a fake process because there is not sufficient time to do proper scrutiny. It’s a fake process because it’s done beyond closed doors,” she said at a press conference.

Apart from the general request to refill the forms sent to the 23 commissioners, some of them will receive tailored questions and observations on the items they declared or failed to declare. 

Commissioners who did declare extensive wealth will face questions on the money’s origins and be asked “to match patrimony with revenue,” two MEPs said. These include Apostolos Tzitzikostas, Marta Kos, Raffaelle Fitto, Jozef Síkela and Costas Kadis.

Dubravka Suica will be asked to sell her shares in the shipping company Atlantska Plovidba, worth €3,684, and in Hrvatski Telecom, worth €2,029.

Kaja Kallas will be questioned on her husband’s ownership of shares a business with ties to Russia.

MEPs will send questions to the commissioners in coming days and will reconvene next week. The JURI committee has until Oct.18. to complete screenings, according to the timeline agreed by the Parliament’s leadership.