Two motions were filed last night to postpone the vote on Ursula von der Leyen’s presidency. One came from non-attached leftist Germany’s Sahra Wagenknecht Alliance, while the other was from The Left group in the European Parliament. These motions were prompted by the European Court of Justice’s annulment of von der Leyen’s Commission’s decision to conceal certain parts of COVID vaccine contracts. The BSW motion requested that the election of the Commission President be delayed until the relevant documents are disclosed, while The Left MEPs asked for an assessment from the Parliament’s legal services on whether the vote should be adjourned. Despite these requests, the motions might not pass due to parliamentary rules requiring a 24-hour notice for postponement requests.
The Left’s co-chairs, Manon Aubry and Martin Schirdewan, criticized von der Leyen’s lack of transparency and questioned her commitment to acting in the public interest. They warned that voting for von der Leyen would endorse backroom deals and a lack of integrity. However, despite these concerns, it is unlikely that the motions will pass. The Green grouping, who were key proponents of the lawsuit against the Commission on vaccine transparency, may find themselves in a difficult position. They have expressed eagerness to vote for von der Leyen, despite the recent court ruling on the need for transparency in the vaccine contracts.
The motions to postpone the vote on Ursula von der Leyen’s presidency were filed due to the European Court of Justice’s recent decision to annul the Commission’s decision to conceal certain parts of COVID vaccine contracts. The BSW and The Left group in the European Parliament both requested a delay in the election of the Commission President until the relevant documents are disclosed. The Left co-chairs criticized von der Leyen’s lack of transparency and warned that voting for her would endorse backroom deals and a lack of integrity. However, the motions may not pass due to parliamentary rules requiring a 24-hour notice for postponement requests.
The Green grouping, who were key proponents of the lawsuit against the Commission on vaccine transparency, may find themselves in a difficult position. Despite expressing eagerness to vote for von der Leyen, the recent court ruling on transparency in the vaccine contracts may raise concerns about the integrity of the vote. It remains to be seen how the Green MEPs will navigate this situation and whether they will ultimately support von der Leyen’s presidency. The outcome of the vote will have significant implications for the future of the European Commission and the transparency of its decision-making processes.
The motions to postpone the vote on Ursula von der Leyen’s presidency highlight growing concerns about transparency and integrity in the European Commission. The recent court ruling on the need to disclose certain parts of COVID vaccine contracts has raised questions about von der Leyen’s commitment to acting in the public interest. The Left co-chairs criticized von der Leyen for her lack of transparency and warned that voting for her would endorse backroom deals. However, the likelihood of the motions passing remains uncertain due to parliamentary rules.
The Green grouping, who played a key role in the lawsuit against the Commission on vaccine transparency, may face a dilemma in deciding whether to support von der Leyen’s presidency. Despite expressing eagerness to vote for her, the recent court ruling may raise concerns about the integrity of the vote. The outcome of the vote will have significant implications for the future of the European Commission and its ability to uphold transparency and act in the public interest. It remains to be seen how the Green MEPs will navigate this situation and what decision they will ultimately make regarding von der Leyen’s presidency.
