Report from the Commission on the application in 2007 of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents
Date: 2008-10-10
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Council of the European Union, European Commission, European Parliament, access to EU information, application of EU law, provision of documents

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 10.10.2008 
COM(2008) 630 final 

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION 

on the application in 2007 of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 regarding public access to 
European Parliament, Council and Commission documents 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION 

on the application in 2007 of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 regarding public access to 
European Parliament, Council and Commission documents 

FOREWORD 

This report, which covers 2007, was drawn up pursuant to Article 17(1) of Regulation (EC) 
No  1049/2001  regarding  public  access  to  European  Parliament,  Council  and  Commission 
documents.1 

The  annex  to  this  report  contains  statistics  on  the  processing  of  access  applications.  The 
statistics refer only to access applications to unpublished documents and do not cover orders 
for published documents or requests for information. 

1. 

Transparency Policy2 

The Commission organised a public consultation on the revision of the legislation on 
public access to documents following the publication, on 18 April 2007, of a Green 
Paper on that subject.3 

2. 

Internet Registers and Sites 

2.1. 

2.2. 

At  the  end  of  2007,  the  register  of  Commission  documents  recorded  86 887 
documents (see annexed table). 

Article 9(3) of the Regulation states that documents defined as “sensitive”4 may be 
recorded in the register only with the consent of the originator. In 2007 no sensitive 
document within the meaning of this provision was included in the register. 

2.3. 

The table below shows the statistics on consultation of the Openness and Access to 
Documents website on EUROPA. 

Number of visitors 

Number of sessions 

Pages viewed 

Total 

Monthly 

39 013 

3 251 

53 848 

4 487 

65 156 

5 430 

1 
2 

3 
4 

OJ L 145, 31.5.2001, p. 43. 
For  further  information  on  transparency  policy,  see  the  General  Report  on  the  Activities  of  the 
European Union for 2007 at: http://europa.eu/generalreport/en/2007/rg10.htm. 
COM(2007) 185, 18 April 2007.  
"documents originating from the institutions or the agencies established by them, from Member States, 
third  countries  or  International  Organisations,  classified  as  "TRÈS  SECRET/TOP  SECRET", 
"SECRET"  or  "CONFIDENTIEL"  in  accordance  with  the  rules  of  the  institution  concerned,  which 
protect essential interests of the European Union or of one or more of its Member States in the areas 
covered by Article 4(1)(a), notably public security, defence and military matters" (Article 9(1)). 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
 
                                                 
average 

3. 

Cooperation with the other institutions and the Member States 

In  accordance  with  the  rotation  rule,  the  European  Parliament  called  a  meeting,  on 
2 October 2007, of the Interinstitutional Committee provided for in Article 15(2) 
of the Regulation. 

In addition, the departments of the three institutions responsible for implementing the 
Regulation continued their forum for discussing legal issues concerning application 
of the Regulation in 2007. 

4. 

Analysis of access applications 

4.1. 

The constant increase in the number of initial applications since the Regulation was 
adopted was again observed in 2007, when 4196 initial applications were registered 
by departments, 355 more than in 2006. 

4.2. 

The number of confirmatory applications virtually doubled; 273 such applications 
were registered in 2007 as against 140 in 2006. 

4.3.  With regard to the breakdown of applications by area of interest, cooperation in 
judicial  matters,  transport  and  energy,  competition,  the  internal  market,  the 
environment and enterprise policy accounted for nearly 40% of applications.  

4.4. 

4.5. 

The breakdown of applications by social and occupational categories confirmed 
the significance of applications from the academic world, which remained the largest 
single category, accounting for more than 30% of the total. 

Lastly,  the  geographical  breakdown  of  applications  remained  constant.  Almost 
20% of applications came from persons or bodies established in Belgium because of 
the number of enterprises, law firms, associations and NGOs operating at European 
level.  Apart  from  that,  the  bulk  of  the  applications  came  from  the  most  highly-
populated  Member  States,  i.e.  Germany,  France,  Italy,  Spain,  the  United  Kingdom 
and  the  Netherlands,  which  together  accounted  for  almost  half  the  applications 
(49.18%). The share of applications from the new Member States remained modest.  

5. 

Application of exceptions to the right of access 

5.1. 

The percentage of initial applications receiving positive responses remained roughly 
the same as the previous year. 

In 72.71% of cases (compared with 73.83% in 2006) the documents were disclosed 
in full, while in 3.88% of cases (compared  with 2.94%  in 2006) partial  access was 
granted. 

5.2. 

The  percentage  of  decisions  confirming  the  initial  decision  decreased  slightly 
(66.30% of cases compared with 69.29% in 2006). 

The percentage of cases in which applications were granted in full after initial refusal 
virtually  doubled  (15.38  %  as  against  8.57  %  in  2006).  The  percentage  of  cases  in 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
which partial access was granted after initial refusal, on the other hand, fell slightly 
(18.32 %, as against 22.14 % in 2006).  

5.3. 

The two main reasons for refusing an initial application continued to be: 

– 

– 

protecting the purpose of inspections, investigations and audits (third indent of 
Article 4(2)), although this was down on 2006 (23.48% of refusals, as against 
30.72% in 2006);  

protecting  the  Commission's  decision-making  process  (Article  4(3)),  with  a 
percentage  of  19.29%  for  cases  concerning  opinions  for  internal  use  and 
12.02% for those where the decision had still to be taken, totalling 31.31% of 
refusals.  

Protection of international relations and protection of commercial interests were cited 
in 10.98% (against 7.06% in 2006) and 10.79% (against 8.94% in 2006) of refusals 
respectively, a marked increase. 

5.4. 

The  main  grounds  for  confirming  refusal  of  access  were  protection  of  commercial 
interests (cited in 25.25% of refusals, against just 16.5% in 2006) and protection of 
the purpose of inspections (24.75%, against 27.18% in 2006). 

Opposition  by  Member  States  to  disclosure  of  documents  originating  from  them 
ranked third, accounting for 19.1% of refusals (against just 10.19% in 2006). 

6. 

Complaints to the European Ombudsman 

6.1. 

In  2007  the  Ombudsman  closed  the  following  sixteen  complaints  against  the 
Commission for refusing to disclose documents:5 

Three cases closed without a finding of maladministration 

2290/2004/IP 

260/2006/BU6 

723/2006/WP 

Nine cases closed with a critical remark 

1434/2004/PB  

144/2005/PB 

1693/2005/PB 

1844/2005/GG 

3002/2005/PB 

3193/2005/TN 

2196/2006/SAB 

3697/2006/PB 

668/2007/MHZ 

Four cases closed without further action 

3269/2005/TN 

2654/2006/PB7 

3678/2006/JMA8 

349/2007/PB9 

5 
6 
7 
8 
9 

See http://www.euro-ombudsman.eu.int/decision/en/default.htm for details.  
Listed by error in the previous report. 
Ditto. 
An action has also been brought in the Court of First Instance in this case. 
Ditto. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
6.2. 

In  the  course  of  2007  the  Ombudsman  received  thirteen  complaints  concerning 
refusal to disclose documents. 

7. 

Court action 

7.1. 

The  Court  of  First  Instance  handed  down  two  judgments  on  cases  relating  to 
Commission  decisions  completely  or  partially  refusing  access  to  documents  under 
Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001.  

7.1.1.  Court  judgment  of  12  September  2007  in  case  T-36/04  Association  de  la  Presse 

Internationale A.S.B.L. ("API") v Commission 

The Court of First Instance annulled in part the Commission decision refusing access 
to pleadings lodged by it in various sets of proceedings before the Court of  Justice 
and the Court of First Instance. The Court ruled that, in cases where the hearing had 
not yet taken place, the “court proceedings” exception applied without the institution 
having  to  carry  out  a  concrete  examination  of  each  document  concerned.  On  the 
other hand, after the hearing had been held, the Commission was under an obligation 
to carry out a concrete assessment of each document requested in order to ascertain, 
having regard to the specific content of that document, whether it could be disclosed 
or whether its disclosure would undermine the court proceedings to which it related. 
If access were refused, a specific statement of reasons demonstrating the risk should 
be provided. 

The  Court  also  took  the  view  that,  in  connected  cases,  the  mere  fact  of  their  being 
connected was not of itself sufficient justification for refusing access.  

As regards infringement proceedings, the Court of First Instance took the view that 
the objective of reaching an amicable settlement continued to justify a refusal even 
after  the  hearing  and  until  such  time  as  the  Court  issued  a  judgment.  The 
Commission, Sweden and API have each lodged an appeal with the Court of Justice 
against this judgment.  

7.1.2.  Court judgment of 8 November 2007 in case T-194/04 The Bavarian Lager Company 

Limited v Commission 

The Court of First Instance annulled a Commission decision to refuse access to the 
names of certain outside persons who had attended a meeting, stating that access to 
documents containing personal data fell solely within the application of Regulation 
No 1049/2001. Having analysed the interaction between Regulations Nos 1049/2001 
and 45/200110, the Court stated that the exception under Article 4(1)(b) of Regulation 
No  1049/2001  concerned  only  personal  data  that  were  capable  of  actually  and 
specifically undermining the protection of privacy and the integrity of the individual. 

The Court ruled that the institution had to demonstrate to a sufficient legal standard 
that  disclosure  of  the  document  in  question  would  actually  and  specifically 
undermine protection of the purposes of investigations. 

10 

Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of 18 December 2000 concerning the protection of individuals with regard 
to the processing of personal data by the Community institutions and bodies and on the free movement 
of such data, OJ L 8 of 12.01.2001, p. 1. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
The  Commission  has  also  lodged  an  appeal  with  the  Court  of  Justice  against  this 
judgment  with  a  view  to  having  the  Court  clarify  the  interaction  between  the  two 
Regulations. 

7.2. 

In addition, the Court of Justice annulled a Court of First Instance judgment11 and the 
relevant Commission decision refusing access to certain documents originating from 
a  Member  State  under  Regulation  1049/2001.  This  was  the  Court  judgment  of 
18 December 2007 in Case C-64/05P Sweden v Commission. 

The Court ruled that Article 4(5) of the Regulation does not confer on the Member 
State  a  general  and  unconditional  right  of  veto,  so  that  it  could  in  a  discretionary 
manner oppose the disclosure of documents originating from it. On the contrary, the 
Member State is required to state the reasons for its objection with reference to the 
exceptions  provided  for  in  the  Regulation.  The  Court  ruled  that,  where  no  such 
reasons were provided, the institution must, if for its part it considered that none of 
those exceptions applied, give access to the document that had been asked for. 

7.3. 

Fifteen  new  actions,  including  six  appeals,  against  Commission  decisions  under 
Regulation 1049/2001 were submitted in 200712

:  

Case C-514/07P, 
Sweden/API and 
Commission 

Case C-528/07P, API/ 
Commission 

Case C-532/07P, 
Commission/ API 

Case C-139/07P, 
Commission/ Technische 
Glaswerke Ilmenau GmbH 

Case C-122/07P, 
Eurostrategies SPRL/ 
Commission 

Case C-107/07P, 
Friedrich Weber/ 
Commission 

Case T-480/07, SIMSA/ 
Commission 

Case T-479/07, Nuova 
Agricast srl/ Commission 

Case  T-477/07, Cofra 
srl/ Commission 

Case T-478/07, Cofra srl/ 
Commission 

Case T-417/07, Lodato 
Gennaro & C. Spa/ 
Commission 

Case T-399/07, Basel 
Polyolefine GmbH/ 
Commission 

Case T-392/07, Guido 
Strack/ Commission 

Case T-111/07, Agrofert 
Holding a.s./ Commission 

Case T-68/07, Landtag 
Schleswig-Holstein/ 
Commission 

8. 

Conclusions 

8.1. 

Characteristics of requests and reasons for refusals: 

As in past years, the overall picture that emerges from analysis of access applications 
is that a large proportion of them relate to Commission monitoring of the application 
of Community law. In a very large number of cases access was applied for in order to 
obtain documents likely to support the applicant's position in a complaint concerning, 

11 

12 

Judgment  of  30 November  2004  in  Case  T-168/02  IFAW  Internationaler  Tierschutz-Fonds  v 
Commission [2004] ECR II-4135. 
See http://curia.europa.eu/jurisp/cgi-bin/form.pl?lang=en for details. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
                                                 
for  example,  an  alleged  infringement  of  Community  law  or  an  administrative  or 
judicial  action.  These  applications  generally  relate  to  large  volumes  of  documents, 
analysis of which gives rise to a substantial administrative burden. 

It should also be noted that the exception relating to protection of the Commission's 
decision-making  process  is  cited  mainly  to  protect  decision-making  on  individual 
issues. In the legislative field, more and  more documents are made available to the 
public  directly,  without  waiting  for  access  applications.  The  Commission's 
Directorates-General  have  developed  their  websites  on  specific  policies  and  have 
used them to make a large number of documents publicly available.  

The exception concerning the protection of commercial interests, which have shown 
a  marked  increase,  is  mainly  cited  in  connection  with  requests  for  access  to 
competition policy documents. 

These  trends,  which  have  become  more  marked  over  the  years,  guided  the 
Commission’s  thinking  when  it  drew  up  it  the  proposed  amendments  to  the 
Regulation. 

8.2. 

Developments in case-law: 

The Court of First Instance has clarified a number of points: 

– 

– 

– 

in  cases  where  the  hearing  has  not  yet  taken  place,  the  “court  proceedings” 
exception  applies  without  the  institution  having  to  carry  out  a  concrete 
examination of each document concerned; 

 the  “investigation”  exception  in  respect  of  infringements  of  Community  law 
applies  even  after  the  hearing  and  until  the  judgment  is  handed  down.  As  a 
rule,  once  the  Court  has  handed  down  its  judgment,  this  reason  no  longer 
applies; 

access  to  documents  containing  personal  data  falls  within  the  scope  of 
Regulation  No  1049/2001.  The  exception  under  Article 4(1)(b)  concerns  only 
personal  data  that  are  capable  of  actually  and  specifically  undermining  the 
protection of privacy and the integrity of the individual. 

In  addition,  the  Court  of  Justice  has  overturned  the  Court  of  First  Instance’s 
interpretation  as  regards  the  right  of  a  Member  State  to  oppose  the  disclosure  of 
documents  originating  from  it,  in  that  the  Member  State  is  required  to  state  the 
reasons  for  its  objection  with  reference  to  the  exceptions  provided  for  in  the 
Regulation. 

The  Commission’s  proposed  amendments  to  the  Regulation  take  account  of 
developments in case-law.  

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
Statistics relating to the application of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 

ANNEX  

1. 

CONTENTS OF THE REGISTER 

COM 

C 

OJ 

PV 

SEC 

Total 

2001 

2002 

2003 

2004 

2005 

2006 

2007 

1 956 

5 389

2 095 

6 478

2 338 

6 823

2 327 

7 484

2 152 

7 313

2 454 

6 628

2 431 

6 647

Total 

15 753 

46 762

INITIAL REQUESTS 

2. 

NUMBER OF APPLICATIONS 

-

134

135

134

129

129

129

790

-

4 773 

12 118

116

113

145

126

380

717

3 066 

11 889

2 467 

11 876

2 718 

12 808

2 674 

12 394

3 032 

12 623

3 255 

13 179

1 597

21 985 

86 887

2005 (1)  

3 396 

2006 

3 841 

2007 

4 196 

3. 

ANSWERS  

2005 (1) 

2006 

2007 

nbr 

% 

nbr 

% 

nbr 

% 

2 188 

64.43

2 836 

73.83 

3 051 

72.71

1 084 

31.92

892 

23.22 

982 

23.40

124 

3.65

113 

2.94 

163 

3.88

total 

3 396 

100.00

3 841 

100.00 

4 196 

100.00

Positive 

Refusal 

Partial access 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
CONFIRMATORY REQUESTS 

4. 

NUMBER OF APPLICATIONS 

2005 (1) 

233 

2006 

140 

2007 

273 

5. 

ANSWERS 

2005 (1) 

2006 

2007 

nbr 

159 

57 

17 

% 

nbr 

% 

nbr 

% 

68.24

24.46

7.30

97 

31 

12 

69.29

181 

66.30

22.14

8.57

50 

42 

18.32

15.38

233 

100.00

140 

100.00

273 

100.00

Confirmation 

Partial revision 

Full revision 

total 

(1) These figures differ appreciably from those in earlier reports as a result of the clarification of the 
definition of requests that is now applied for processing data records. 

BREAKDOWN OF REFUSALS BY EXCEPTION APPLIED (%) 

6. 

INITIAL REQUESTS 

4.1.a Protection of the public interest – 1st 
indent – public security 
4.1.a Protection of the public interest – 2nd 
indent - defence and military matters 
4.1.a Protection of the public interest – 3rd 
indent - international relations 
4.1.a Protection of the public interest – 4th 
indent - financial, monetary or economic 
policy 
4.1.b. Protection of the privacy and the 
integrity of the individual 
4.2. 1st indent - Protection of commercial 
interests 
4.2. 2nd indent - Protection of court 
proceedings and legal advice 
4.2. 3rd indent - Protection of inspections, 
investigations and audits 

2005 
0.28 

0.21 

4.17 

2.55 

3.68 

7.78 

8.63 

2006 
1.53 

0.60 

7.06 

1.19 

4.85 

8.94 

7.49 

2007 
1.19 

2.23 

10.98 

1.26 

5.04 

10.79 

6.08 

41.80 

30.72 

23.48 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
4.3 1st indent – Decision-making process, 
no decision yet taken 
4.3. 2nd indent - Decision making process, 
decision already taken: Opinions for 
internal use as part of deliberations and 
preliminary consultations 
4.5. Refusal by Member State 

12.73 

14.30 

12.02 

14.36 

19.06 

19.29 

3.82 

4.26 

7.64 

total

100.00 

100.00 

100.00 

7. 

CONFIRMATORY REQUESTS 

4.1.a Protection of the public interest – 1st 
indent – public security 
4.1.a Protection of the public interest – 2nd 
indent - defence and military matters 
4.1.a Protection of the public interest – 3rd 
indent - international relations 
4.1.a Protection of the public interest – 4th 
indent - financial, monetary or economic 
policy 
4.1.b. Protection of the privacy and the 
integrity of the individual 
4.2. 1st indent - Protection of commercial 
interests 
4.2. 2nd indent - Protection of court 
proceedings and legal advice 
4.2. 3rd indent - Protection of inspections, 
investigations and audits 
4.3 1st indent – Decision-making process, 
no decision yet taken  
4.3. 2nd indent - Decision making process, 
decision already taken: Opinions for 
internal use as part of deliberations and 
preliminary consultations 
4.5. Refusal by Member State 

2005 

2006 

2007 

0.00 

0.00 

5.31 

0.00 

0.49 

3.40 

0.53 

0.97 

10.61 

13.59 

0.9 

0.4 

2.2 

0.4 

4.8 

14.32 

16.50 

25.25 

10.88 

10.19 

4.8 

28.38 

27.18 

24.75 

7.96 

7.77 

5.7 

12.47 
9.55 

9.71 
10.19 

11.7 
19.1 

total

100.00 

100.00 

100.00 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
 
BREAKDOWN OF REQUESTS 

8. 

ACCORDING TO SOCIAL AND OCCUPATIONAL PROFILE OF REQUESTERS (%) 

Academics 

Civil society (interest groups. 
industry, NGOs, etc.) 

Members of the public whose profile 
was not indicated 

Public authorities (other than the EU 
institutions) 

2005 
10.49 

2006 
32.08 

2007 
31.85 

29.44 

17.27 

17.77 

31.89 

16.55 

15.33 

12.32 

15.67 

15.69 

Lawyers 

11.00 

10.43 

Other EU institutions 

Journalists 

3.78 

1.07 

06.85 

01.14 

9.69 

6.75 

2.90 

9. 

ACCORDING TO GEOGRAPHICAL ORIGIN (%) 

Belgium 
Germany 
France 
Italy 
United Kingdom 
Netherlands 
Spain 
Austria 
Poland 
Luxembourg 
Not specified 
Denmark 
Portugal 
Sweden 
Lithuania 
Greece 
Ireland 
Czech Republic 
Hungary 

EN 

2006 
20.26 
18.67 
9.31 
8.41 
5.73 
5.35 
5.33 
3.18 
2.61 
2.15 
1.64 
1.55 
1.31 
1.24 
1.21 
1.20 
1.15 
1.08 
0.95 

2007 
19.86 
15.58 
9.32 
8.18 
5.76 
4.42 
5.92 
2.71 
2.41 
2.80 
1.16 
1.23 
1.18 
1.46 
0.55 
1.50 
0.82 
0.89 
0.86 

2005 
22.63 
13.24 
9.71 
9.77 
6.62 
5.29 
5.52 
1.92 
1.48 
0.66 
7.44 
2.14 
1.54 
1.10 
0.28 
1.92 
1.70 
0.63 
0.60 

11 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
United States 
Finland 
Switzerland 
Other 
Norway 
Malta 
Slovakia 
Estonia 
Slovenia 
Cyprus 
Bulgaria 
Turkey 
Croatia 
Latvia 
Romania 
Japan 
Canada 
Australia 
Ukraine 
Liechtenstein 
Russia 
Israel 
China (incl. Hong Kong) 
FYROM13 
Albania 
Brazil 
Iceland 
Mexico 
Egypt 
India 
Taiwan 

EU countries 

Candidate countries  

Other 

Not-specified 

13 

Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. 

EN 

0.89 
0.78 
0.77 
0.63 
0.51 
0.49 
0.37 
0.37 
0.31 
0.26 
0.25 
0.22 
0.22 
0.20 
0.20 
0.18 
0.15 
0.15 
0.14 
0.12 
0.11 
0.09 
0.08 
0.08 
0.05 
0.05 
0.03 
0.02 

2006 

93.93 

0.22 

3.49 

2.37 

0.61 
1.43 
0.82 
1.76 
0.32 
0.45 
0.59 
0.29 
1.80 
0.25 
0.94 
0.12 
0.43 
0.14 
0.96 
0.20 
0.25 
0.07 
0.04 
0.45 
0.05 
0.12 
1.01 
0.04 
0.02 
0.04 
0.02 
0.05 
0.14 

2007 

92.28 

0.12 

4.55 

3.05 

0.69 
0.88 
0.85 

0.44 
0.35 
0.38 
0.13 
0.19 
0.16 
0.25 
0.09 
0.09 
0.28 
0.16 
0.03 
0.16 

0.03 
0.09 
0.06 
0.06 
0.06 
0.03 
0.03 
0.03 
0.06 
0.03 
0.06 
0.03 
0.03 

2005 

89.13 

0.54 

3.34 

7.50 

12 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
  
 
  
 
 
                                                 
10. 

ACCORDING TO AREAS OF INTEREST (%) 

Directorate-General / Service 

2007 

SG – Secretariat-General 
JLS - Justice, Freedom and Security 
TREN - Energy and Transport 
COMP – Competition 
MARKT - Internal market 
ENV – Environment 
ENTR – Enterprise 
TAXUD - Taxation and Customs Union 

SANCO – Health and Consumer Protection 

AGRI — Agriculture 
RELEX - External Relations 
REGIO - Regional Policy 
ELARG – Enlargement 
EMPL — Employment and Social Affairs 
TRADE – Trade 
ADMIN - Personnel and Administration 

INFSO - Information Society  
DEV – Development 
RTD – Research 
EAC - Education and Culture 
SJ – Legal Service 
BUDG – Budget 
AIDCO - EuropeAid Cooperation Office 

ECFIN - Economic and Financial Affairs 

FISH – Fisheries 
COMM – Communication 
OLAF - European Anti-fraud Office 

DGT - Directorate-General for Translation 

ESTAT – Eurostat 
ADMIN (OIB) 
ECHO - Humanitarian Office 

CAB - Commissioners' private offices 
PMO – Office for Administration and Payment of Individual 
Entitlements 
IAS - Internal audit unit 
EPSO - Recruitment Office 

10.19%
8.45%
7.54%
7.32%
6.46%
6.11%
5.48%
4.82%

4.27%

4.11%
4.09%
3.69%
3.18%
3.10%
2.48%
2.34%

2.21%
2.12%
1.64%
1.58%
1.34%
1.31%
1.27%

1.07%

0.95%
0.73%
0.45%

0.40%

0.24%
0.22%
0.21%

0.16%
0.13%

0.10%
0.08%

EN 

13 

   EN 

 
BEPA - Bureau of European Policy Advisers 

DIGIT 
OPOCE – Publications Office 
FC - Financial Control 
JRC - Joint Research Centre 

SCIC - Joint Interpreting and Conference Service 

Total: 

0.06%

0.03%
0.03%
0.02%
0.02%

0.02%

100.00%

EN 

14 

   EN