Kallas plans watchdogs to keep tabs on OLAF

By Simon Taylor

Date: 18/05/06

Administrative Affairs Commissioner Siim Kallas will next week propose setting up an independent adjudicator to answer complaints from people being investigated by the EU's anti-fraud office OLAF.

The move is part of a package of reforms intended to improve the anti-fraud office's efficiency and reputation. OLAF has been strongly criticised for not focusing on priority cases and failing to respect the rights of EU officials under investigation.

An inter-institutional committee made up of representatives of the various EU bodies would set OLAF's priorities and monitor its efficiency to ensure that cases are resolved as quickly as possible. The average time for OLAF to conclude an investigation is 23 months, which MEPs want reduced. But the Commission has decided not to propose replacing the current supervisory committee, made up of five anti-fraud experts, with the new inter-institutional committee, so the two would co-exist.

A Commission official said the intention was "to draw on the lessons of the past" by "improving the efficiency of OLAF's work", providing "better procedural guarantees" and better management of the length of investigations.

MEPs have accused OLAF of failing to tackle problems in the EU institutions while pursuing higher-profile cases such as cigarette-smuggling.

The reforms would require OLAF to inform EU institutions when they were under investigation and when it passed on the results of investigations to national judicial authorities. These requirements follow complaints about the handling of the Eurostat case of 2003 in which senior officials at the EU's statistical agency were allegedly creating hidden accounts to manage EU funds. As OLAF is formally and operationally independent of the Commission, it did not inform the institution about the case. The Commission complained that it might have taken action to stop irregularities had it known of OLAF's concerns.

Kallas also wants OLAF to inform whistleblowers when their information leads to the launch of an investigation.

Under the reform plans, people being investigated would be able to see the results and to comment. If they felt that their rights had not been respected, they could complain to the independent adjudicator who would rule within strict deadlines whether proper procedures had been followed.

Austrian Socialist MEP Herbert Bösch, who has drafted Parliament reports on OLAF, warned that creating an inter-institutional committee might lead to "communications problems and competition" and that it could lead to excessive political influence over OLAF's work.

He said that it should be written into OLAF's statute that its priority was internal cases. "The financial consequences of such cases are minimal but the political consequences are enormous as the

Eurostat case shows," he said. This was important to avoid the anti-fraud office taking on too many tasks. "I don't want OLAF dancing at all marriages," he said.

MEPs are considering investigating whether OLAF Director-General Franz-Hermann Brüner misled the European Ombudsman Nikos Diamandouros over the case of the journalist Hans-Martin Tillack, as the ombudsman claims. On Monday (15 May), the petitions committee heard both sides. While the committee favoured a report on the affair, leaders of the three biggest groups were opposed to a report.

Tillack expressed scepticism over the reforms. "The idea of the independent adviser [adjudicator] depends on whose authority he's under. If he reports to Brüner, it's no good," he said.

Article anticipates the presentation of plans for reform of the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) by Administrative Affairs Commissioner Siim Kallas. These plans were expected to include the setting up an independent adjudicator to answer complaints from people being investigated by OLAF. The move was part of a package of reforms intended to improve the anti-fraud office's efficiency and reputation. OLAF had been strongly criticised for not focusing on priority cases and failing to respect the rights of EU officials under investigation.

• Primary Source

European Commission: European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) http://ec.europa.eu/anti_fraud/index_en.htm

---