EditBurn before reading
EU agencies, which should operate in a transparent manner, are drifting in the opposite direction
As the EU General Court were putting the final touches to its decision in Case T-36/ 23, Stevi and The New York Times v Commission – ‘the Pfizergate’ – Case, the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) sent a document “EIOPA Equivalence Monitoring Report 2024″ to the EU Parliament.
EIOPA, an agency unfamiliar to most EU citizens, was established to help protect insurance policyholders, pension scheme members and beneficiaries. It is an important if not well-known agency.
Given the spotlight Pfizergate put on the way the EU does business the timing of the 2024 Monitoring Report release was rather ironic: EIOPA has an obsession with secrecy.
The notice issued to MEPs when the Monitoring Report landed reflects that. It emphasised that only Members who have signed a ‘solemn declaration’ may have access. Assess would be on a ‘need to know’ basis. MEPs were informed the link to the document was personal, must not be shared, can be used only on a European Parliament device, must not be printed and should not be copy-pasted. It reads a little like something penned by Ian Flemming on a bad day – or a spy comedy starring Leslie Nielsen.
While documents containing sensitive information should be handled carefully, the tone of the notice captures much that needs to be said about EIOPA’s secrecy obsession. Like the Pfizergate affair, it also spotlights an uncomfortable reality that EU agencies, which EU law requires to operate in an open and transparent manner, are drifting in the opposite direction.
The EU Parliament has well-crafted long-standing rules governing the treatment of confidential information. These are not good enough for EIOPA which has been allowed to set its own standards and to apply them in a way that has less to do with ensuring necessary confidentiality than to shoring up a determination to protect EIOPA’s operations from legitimate scrutiny.
That determination was strikingly demonstrated by EIOPA’s approach in the case of a Slovak insurance company. In 2022 EIOPA issued a Recommendation to Národná banka Slovenska, the Slovak regulator that it take action against a Bratislava based company which pursued cross-border insurance business. EIOPA wanted the company’s operating license to be removed. The Slovak regulator pushed back but, when the Commission sided with EIOPA, was forced to capitulate.
The company NOVIS Insurance sought access to EIOPA documents in its case. EIOPA refused access arguing it needed to protect possible court actions, to protect audits/investigations, and to protect its own decision-making procedures.
NOVIS appealed EIOPA’s decision. The European Supervisory Authorities Board of Appeal found EIOPA’s blanket refusal unjustified and required it to make an amended decision. After further prevarication EIOPA released one document, a redacted version of its May 2022 Recommendation.
Demonstrating EIOPA’s solid determination to keep its actions secret, 18 of the document’s 19 pages of text had significant redactions; over 80 per cent of the text on 11 of those pages was fully redacted. The document, as released, was virtually useless.
A non-redacted version of the Recommendation became available when NOVIS commenced legal actions via the European Court. It revealed that material used in EIOPA’s analysis contained highly questionable assumptions on annual policy cancellation rates and the annual costs of servicing policies. The questions raised do little to install confidence in EIOPA or in the Commission’s decision to back it.
EIOPA is tasked with an important job. It has been entrusted with serious responsibilities. As with any public institution EIOPA can only retain the confidence of the public it serves if it operates openly, efficiently, effectively and fairly.
Openness in public administration is a foundation in confidence building. That applies not only to EIOPA – it applies to all EU institutions and agencies. Confidence is hard won and easily lost.
EUalive’s columnist Dick Roche was the minister of state for European affairs when Ireland conducted the two referendums on the Treaty of Lisbon of the European Union, in 2008 and 2009. His other columns can be found here.
Photo: AI-generated image of a redacted report.
Updated: May 27, 2025 - 05:23
