Source: European Parliament
Question for written answer E-002742/2025
to the Commission
Rule 144
Michał Dworczyk (ECR)
The judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in the Smart Kid Belt case[1] and the Pfizergate scandal highlight a growing problem: the lack of real democratic control over the Commission. A common thread in both cases is a lack of transparency and acquiescence to corporate lobbying. Such institutional arrogance, manifested in the Commission’s disregard for court judgments, MEPs’ requests and transparency rules, undermines public trust in European institutions.
As in the Pfizergate case, the CJEU ruled in the Smart Kid Belt case that the Commission had unjustifiably refused to disclose correspondence with representatives of children’s car seat manufacturers. These consultations effectively resulted in the elimination from the market of an innovative product made by a Polish company. The emails between representatives of children’s car seat manufacturers and a Commission official[2] that have come to light indicate biased and unethical actions supporting the interests of large companies to the detriment of a legally approved Polish product.
In light of the above:
- 1.In light of the aforementioned judgment, does the Commission intend to carry out an investigation into abuse of office, conflict of interest and breach of professional ethics?
- 2.In light of the clearly biased actions of Commission officials in the Smart Kid Belt case, have any professional or disciplinary measures been taken against those involved, and if not, why not?
- 3.Will the Commission carry out an internal assessment of its consultation procedures and access to documents following the judgments in the Smart Kid Belt and Pfizergate cases, and does it plan to review its policy on transparency and access to information?
Submitted: 4.7.2025