WRITTEN QUESTION E-2582/03 by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Course of events involving the whistleblower at the European Court of Auditors 2: complications for assessment arising from simultaneous need to investigate superiors.
Date: 2003-08-06
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Court of Auditors, European official, administrative responsibility, committee (EU), duties of civil servants, fraud against the EU, operation of the Institutions, rules of procedure

6.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 58 E/185

(2004/C 58 E/198)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2582/03

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(6 August 2003)

Subject: Course of events involving the whistleblower at the European Court of Auditors 2: complications

for assessment arising from simultaneous need to investigate superiors

1.
Does the Commission regard it as a relevant or irrelevant fact that, according to his own testimony
and to the recommendation of a disciplinary committee, a conscientious whistleblower acted in good faith
and in the interests of a European institution?

Can the Commission indicate the number of occasions on which a legally empowered authority of a
2.
European institution has, on its own responsibility,
ignored the recommendation of the disciplinary
committee? Does the Commission deem the disregarding by the competent authority of a (repeated)
recommendation of the disciplinary committee to constitute contempt of that committee?

3.
Has the Commission subsequently asked the Secretary-General whether, when taking his decision to
dismiss the official, he took account of the complaints lodged by the whistleblower against the former
Member of the Court of Auditors, Mrs Nikolaou, which the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) and the
legal authorities have already investigated or are still investigating?

4.
Has the Commission asked OLAF why, in that institution’s Press Release No 18, no details were given
of the services rendered by the whistleblower as the person whose information had resulted in the
initiation of a legal
investigation into the conduct of the former Member of the Court of Auditors,
Mrs Nikolaou?

Given the recommendation of the disciplinary committee, does the Commission conclude that an
5.
honest whistleblower is required to infringe the provisions of the first paragraph of Article 21 of the Staff
Regulations of Officials, pursuant to which he must assist his superiors, in instances where the contested
illegal acts appear to have be committed by persons who are actually amongst those superiors?

Does the Commission feel that it is responsible for the future of officials employed by EU institutions
6.
who have honestly tried to terminate what they regard as wrongdoing by drawing attention thereto? How
does it interpret its responsibility?

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-2581/03 and E-2582/03
given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(30 September 2003)

Each Institution of the European Union is an employer in its own right and each of the Institutions
therefore manages disciplinary matters relating to its own staff, under the provisions of
the Staff
Regulations and subject to the judgements of the European Court of Justice. As the case referred to by the
Honourable Member concerns a person who was employed by the Court of Auditors, the Commission is
not able to answer questions about this specific case. The Honourable Member may wish to address his
questions to the Court of Auditors.

(2004/C 58 E/199)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2605/03

by Elizabeth Lynne (ELDR) to the Commission

(28 August 2003)

Subject: Recognition of qualifications for language teachers

Is the Commission aware that a British teacher of English having all adequate qualifications and teaching
experience in the United Kingdom is required to pass the CAPES exam (Certificat d’aptitude pédagogique à
l’enseignement du second degré, a very difficult exam, particularly for a foreigner) in order to be able to
have a full-time teacher position in the French education system?