European Parliament uncertain about impact of Qatargate

A tough approach, a new regime and a clean slate. With that message, the European Parliament is trying to pick up the thread this week in Strasbourg, a month after revelations about a major corruption scandal. But while MEPs argue about how strict new lobbying rules should be, uncertainty remains about the impact and scope of the scandal.

With a series of raids and house searches, the Belgian judiciary brought to light a bribery affair in and around the European Parliament at the beginning of December. In addition to Gulf state Qatar, Morocco is also said to have influenced European decision-making through money and gifts. Four people have since been detained, including Greek MEP Eva Kaili and Italian former MEP Antonio Panzeri.

This Monday, the President of the European Parliament formally initiated the procedure to lift the parliamentary immunity of two more MEPs, in response to a request from the Belgian judiciary. It concerns the Belgian Marc Tarabella and the Italian Andrea Cozzolino, both part of the Social Democratic group.

In principle, MEPs enjoy immunity – unless they are caught red-handed, like Kaili with suitcases full of cash. In the coming weeks, Tarabella and Cozzolino will have the opportunity to defend themselves against the request, after which the European Parliament can actually lift the immunity in February.

Whether it stays here? One month after the first revelations, MEPs still fear the scope of the scandal. Last week, the Belgian socialist MEP Marie Arena also resigned from her chairmanship of the human rights commission after Politics revealed that she failed to report a paid trip to Qatar.

Meanwhile, the debate has started within the European Parliament about new measures that should reduce the risk of recurrence. Last week, chairman Roberta Metsola presented a fourteen-point plan that should be implemented within a month. This includes a proposal for a cooling-off period for former MEPs who want to lobby, an obligation to make meetings with third parties public, and a ban on so-called ‘friendship groups’ with third countries – according to critics disguised lobbying vehicles.

The Social Democrats want, among other things, greater protection for whistleblowers

But the question of whether the plan goes far enough has immediately been the subject of discussion. The Social Democratic Party in particular, pivotal in the corruption scandal, is making a great effort to show its strictest side. The party wants, among other things, greater protection for whistleblowers. The left-wing and green groups in the European Parliament also find the proposals too weak and also want mandatory transparency about declaring assets, for example. On the other hand, right-of-center MEPs fear new bureaucracy and defend the freedom that should come with the elected mandate.

Politicized

Thus, after the initial shock, the scandal and the response to it are now gently becoming more politicised. Certainly because it is still only the Social Democratic group that is under suspicion, the reproaches and accusations from other parties are getting underway.

When the European Parliament debates the scandal for the second time this Tuesday, it is expected to come to the surface. All the more so because parties are preying on the positions of social-democratic MEPs who are now under suspicion – this week first and foremost that of Kaili, who was also vice-president.

Elections loom on the horizon in just over a year’s time. Now that the reputation of the EP has taken such a blow, the question is whether there is enough time to restore it. Metsola called on Monday to do everything possible to regain the trust of citizens. Our house is the epitome of European parliamentary democracy and I need your help to strengthen its pillars.