Belgian Court to Decide on Ursula von der Leyen’s Immunity in Vaccine Procurement Dispute
The EU Commission President is accused of corruption and procedural breaches related to COVID-19 vaccine contracts, with a Belgian court examining her immunity.
A Belgian court in Liège is slated to decide on January 6, 2025, if Ursula von der Leyen, the President of the European Commission, will maintain legal immunity amidst corruption allegations related to COVID-19 vaccine procurement.
This decision follows a complaint by Belgian lobbyist Frederic Baldan, accusing von der Leyen of corruption, destruction of public documents, and procedural violations.
Case Background
The allegations against von der Leyen arise from claims that she secretly negotiated with Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla via SMS to secure a €35 billion contract for 1.8 billion COVID-19 vaccine doses.
Frederic Baldan claims these negotiations bypassed EU member states and lacked transparency.
Von der Leyen has claimed the SMS messages were "accidentally deleted." The court might accidentally believe her...
The first hearing was on May 17, 2024, where the court confirmed it had jurisdiction over the case.
Proceedings were delayed when the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) objected, arguing von der Leyen’s immunity as EU Commission President shields her from prosecution.
Charges and Allegations
The accusations against von der Leyen include:
Usurpation of functions and title: Allegedly ignoring established procurement protocols.
Destruction of public documents: Accusations of deleting SMS during critical vaccine negotiations.
High-level corruption: Allegations of secretive dealings with Pfizer.
The EPPO, responsible for investigating financial crimes within EU institutions, supports von der Leyen's claim of immunity.
Critics, including Baldan, question the impartiality of the EPPO, suggesting it protects von der Leyen rather than investigates corruption claims.
Frederic Baldan’s Role
Frederic Baldan, the complainant, has been pivotal in the controversy termed "Pfizergate." In 2023, he filed a criminal complaint accusing von der Leyen of abuse of authority, document destruction, and corruption in the vaccine negotiations.
Baldan argues these actions breached EU regulations and inflicted financial damage to public funds.
Next Steps
The Belgian court's decision on January 6 will determine if von der Leyen's immunity applies in this case.
If the court rules against her immunity, the allegations could lead to formal proceedings against the European Commission President.
The hearing’s outcome will have significant implications for accountability and transparency within EU institutions.
The case highlights ongoing concerns about the COVID-19 vaccine procurement process and broader governance and oversight implications within the EU.
This decision follows a complaint by Belgian lobbyist Frederic Baldan, accusing von der Leyen of corruption, destruction of public documents, and procedural violations.
Case Background
The allegations against von der Leyen arise from claims that she secretly negotiated with Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla via SMS to secure a €35 billion contract for 1.8 billion COVID-19 vaccine doses.
Frederic Baldan claims these negotiations bypassed EU member states and lacked transparency.
Von der Leyen has claimed the SMS messages were "accidentally deleted." The court might accidentally believe her...
The first hearing was on May 17, 2024, where the court confirmed it had jurisdiction over the case.
Proceedings were delayed when the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) objected, arguing von der Leyen’s immunity as EU Commission President shields her from prosecution.
Charges and Allegations
The accusations against von der Leyen include:
Usurpation of functions and title: Allegedly ignoring established procurement protocols.
Destruction of public documents: Accusations of deleting SMS during critical vaccine negotiations.
High-level corruption: Allegations of secretive dealings with Pfizer.
The EPPO, responsible for investigating financial crimes within EU institutions, supports von der Leyen's claim of immunity.
Critics, including Baldan, question the impartiality of the EPPO, suggesting it protects von der Leyen rather than investigates corruption claims.
Frederic Baldan’s Role
Frederic Baldan, the complainant, has been pivotal in the controversy termed "Pfizergate." In 2023, he filed a criminal complaint accusing von der Leyen of abuse of authority, document destruction, and corruption in the vaccine negotiations.
Baldan argues these actions breached EU regulations and inflicted financial damage to public funds.
Next Steps
The Belgian court's decision on January 6 will determine if von der Leyen's immunity applies in this case.
If the court rules against her immunity, the allegations could lead to formal proceedings against the European Commission President.
The hearing’s outcome will have significant implications for accountability and transparency within EU institutions.
The case highlights ongoing concerns about the COVID-19 vaccine procurement process and broader governance and oversight implications within the EU.
AI Disclaimer: An advanced artificial intelligence (AI) system generated the content of this page on its own. This innovative technology conducts extensive research from a variety of reliable sources, performs rigorous fact-checking and verification, cleans up and balances biased or manipulated content, and presents a minimal factual summary that is just enough yet essential for you to function as an informed and educated citizen. Please keep in mind, however, that this system is an evolving technology, and as a result, the article may contain accidental inaccuracies or errors. We urge you to help us improve our site by reporting any inaccuracies you find using the "Contact Us" link at the bottom of this page. Your helpful feedback helps us improve our system and deliver more precise content. When you find an article of interest here, please look for the full and extensive coverage of this topic in traditional news sources, as they are written by professional journalists that we try to support, not replace. We appreciate your understanding and assistance.
