.png)
MEPs demand controls on OLAF investigations after Dalli resignation
The side effects of the resignation of Maltese commissioner John Dalli last October are being felt in the EU institutions, after German MEP Inge Graessle introduced five amendments to the budget discharged for the way OLAF is conducting investigations.
17 March 2013, 12:00am
Matthew Vella
Matthew Vella
1 min read
The EU's anti-fraud unit OLAF claimed there was "substantial circumstantial evidence" that Dalli was aware that a Maltese businessman, Silvio Zammit, was trying to sell access to the minister or influencing a trade ban on snus in return for a €60 million bribe.
The OLAF report, which so far has not seen the light of day, became the subject of Dalli's resignation on 16 October, 2012 even though the former commissioner for health and consumer policy was never granted access to the report.
Dalli has now appointed lawyers Ariti-Marina Alamanou, Lawry Laure and Stefano Rodriguez to represent him at the European Court of Justice, after he applied for an annulment of the dismissal of the President José Manuel Barroso, claiming that Article 245 of the Treaty of the European Union was violated by the Commission.
Dalli has also filed a complaint with the Belgian prosecutors against Swedish complainers Swedish Match, who informed OLAF that Zammit had asked for €60 million to reverse a decision to ban snus from being sold across the EU.
However, German MEP Inge Graessle (EPP) of the budgetary control committee (CONT) has introduced five amendments in the budget discharge debate to be voted on next week, concerning the way OLAF is conducting investigations.
The amendments strengthen the procedural rights of persons concerned by the OLAF's investigations: amongst them the right for the person concerned by an investigation to make their views known before conclusions referring by name to him or her have been drawn; the right to be given a summary of the matters under investigations and to be invited to comment on these matters; the right to be assisted by a person of his/her choice during an interview; and the principle that any person concerned by an investigation shall be entitled to avoid self-incrimination.
Matthew Vella, a freelance journalist at MaltaToday, was formerly executive editor at Malt...
•
Justice, these OLAF operators are just politicians who are ready and willing to grab power (and all that follows) for their own purposes. These 5 amendments are vital, BUT more important is having regulators controlling other lower level regulators. AND most important of all, a truly free press. Here in Malta, we do know from long experience how extremely difficult it is to have a free press.
•
One now hopes that the new administration authorizes the release of the OLAF investigative report which claims that there is "substantial circumstantial evidence" that forced Mr Jose Manuel Barroso to force Mr John Dalli to resign as EU Commissioner.
Mr John Dalli does not even know what the OLAF report says in his regard. How can one defend oneself if one is ignorant of what one is being accused of? On what can one's defendants base their defence on?
Therefore the release of the report would only be that justice is done. This way one would know what the real reasons were why the OLAF report was not released for public knowledge by the previous administration.
•
The amendments proposed by Inge Graessle are the basic tenets of any democratic principles at law, as encapsulated in the European Charter. It is surprising and shameful that OLAF did not follow simple basic principles guaranteed to the worse criminals, let alone a European Commissioner. The OLAF members are supposed to be the pick of EU Nations but the way they performed has shown that they still have to learn their basics in democracy and shift away from their dictatorial and arrogant stance.
